Skip to main content

Full text of "Transactions of the West Kent Natural History, Microscopical & Photographic Society."

See other formats

Meetings of tbe Society, 


Wednesday, March • •• 

„ April 

„ May 

„ October ... 

„ November 

„ December 

,, January 

t f February 

The Chair is taken at Eight o'clock. 

25th, 1903. 
22nd ft 

28th ft 
27th, 1904. 
24th „ (Annual) 




est Hknt ijatural jjistorn, 
JRfcrascopicaJ Sc photographic Societg, 


*f 1903-1904, * 


BjjDcmiioh : 


i y o i . 



tst fieitt Natural Distorg, 
JRicrascqm&l & photographic (Society 



♦5* 1903h1904, **♦ 


bonbon : 


1 1) 4 . 




SRcst ft cut Natural gpjstovg, JEicroampic&l anb 
Photographic §oriet}}. 

Elected at the Annual Meeting, February 25 th, 1903. 
FOR THE SESSION, 19031904. 

George Draper, F.R.G.S. 

H. T. Adams, M.A., F.R.A.S. 


T. O. Donaldson, M. Inst. C.E. 
Walter Kidd, M.D., F.Z.S. 

3)0ii. treasurer. 
Herbert Jones, F.S.A., F.L.S. 

3)on. (Secretaries. 

H. Hainworth, F.R.H.S. 
Lewis B. Draper. 




A. Deed. 

Stanley Edwards, F.R.G.S., 

W. H. Gover. 
R. N. Kiddle, L.D.S 
Morgan May. 
R. McLachlan, F.R.S. 

J. M. Stone, M.A. 
J. C. Weare. 
W. Webster, F.C.S. 
T. B. Wire. 

H. F. Witherby, F.Z.S., 

P. T. Wrigley, M.A. 



88 est itettt Natural pBtorg, Microscopical anb 
Photographic Socictj). 

Elected at the Annual Meeting, February 2±t/i, 1904. 

FOR THE SESSION, 1904-1905. 

Walter Kidd, M.D., F.Z.S. 

13 ke-$hesi bents. 

H. J. Adams, M.A., F.R.A.S. 
G. Draper, F.R.G.S. 
R. McLachlan, F.R.S., &c. 
J. M. Stone, M.A. 

Herbert Jones, F.S.A., F.L.S. 

Jjon. §zcxzt&txz8. 
H. Hainworth, F.R.H.S. 




W. H. Gover. 

R. N. Kiddle, L.D.S. 

V. H. Low. 

Morgan May. 

H. S. Saunders. 

W. Webster, F.C.S. 

J. C. Weare. 



M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P 

T. H. Blakesley, M.A., C.E. 

Alfred Deed, F.R.G.S., 

Stanley Edwards, F.R.G.S., 


For the Session 1903-1904. 

fN presenting the Report for the past Session, the Council 
regret to state that the number of the Members is much 
less than they would like to see ; and they trust that great 
efforts may be made during the current year to add new- 
Members to the Society. 

The number of Members at present are : — 

4 Honorary Members. 
6 Life Members. 
58 Ordinary Members. 

The Society was formed in 1858. In 1863, there were 113 
Members ; the Council hope that a roll of 100 Subscribing 
Members, bringing in an annual income of about £50, may be 
shortly attained ; in which case, the usefulness of the Society 
would be immensely increased. 

During the past year, the Society has lost by death three 
Members, Messrs. Donaldson, Smith, and A. G. Jones ; all of 
them had belonged to it from 27 to 16 years. 

Mr. Donaldson hardly ever missed attending the various 
Meetings, and had been a Member for no less than 27 years, 
having joined the Society in 1876 ; served on the Council since 
1880, and was President for the years 1886 and 1887. He was 
a Member of the Institute of Civil Engineers, and when a 
young man, constructed railways in France and the West 
Indies, as well as in England. He was a Director of the Art 
Union of London. His loss will be greatly felt. 

Ten Members have joined ; it is hoped that they may bring 
fresh energy and interest into the work of the Society. 

The Council much regret that Mr. L. B. Draper, being 
unable to continue the work of Hon. Sec, has resigned. They 
trust that some other Member will volunteer to take his place. 


The Accounts of the Hon. Treasurer have been duly 
audited, and show an adverse balance of £12 5s., notwithstand- 
ing the very welcome donation of £5 from an old Member, 
towards the reduction of the previous year's deficiency. It will 
be seen that the ordinary expenditure amounted to £23 5s. 7d. ; 
the receipts from subscriptions to £81 10s. No subscriptions 
for the year 1904 are included in this account, but there were 
none outstanding on the 31st December, 1903, as has some- 
times been the case in former years. 

Many objects of interest have been exhibited, and the 
following papers read at the Ordinary Meetings : — 

On 25th March, 1903.— Mr. W. Webster, F.C.S., on 
" Recent Developments in X Rays." 

On 22nd April. — -Mr. J. F. Green, on "The Fauna of 'The 
Cedars,' Lee." 

On 27th May. — Mr. W. B. Billinghurst, on " Animal Para- 
sites — Entozoa." 

On 25th November. — Mr. W. H. Gover, assisted by Mr. 
A. S. Gover, exhibited, by the aid of the limelight, numerous 
photographs taken by him of the scenery in the district 
between Arolla and Zermatt. 

On 27th January, 1904. — Mr. J. F. Green, on "Protective 

On 24th February. — Dr. Walter Kidd, on " The Relation 
between Muscular Activity and Beauty of Form in Animals." 

The President being abroad at the time of the Annual 
Meeting, the usual Address will be given at a subsequent 

A most successful Soiree was held on the 14th May, in the 
Hall adjoining the Congregational Church. During the even- 
ing, Mr. W. Webster, F.C.S., gave a Demonstration of Radium 
and the Rontgen Rays. Mr. Holding delivered two Lecturettes 
on " Modification of the Hand and Foot," and " Geological 
Distribution of Birds." Music, Vocal and Instrumental, was 
kindly contributed by Madame Annie Buckland, and Messrs. 
Beadle, W. B. Billinghurst, L. B. Draper, and R. Tonking. 

The Field Meeting was held at Maidstone, on 25th June, 
and was well attended. The Members were show n over the 


Church by the late Canon Joy, and in the afternoon, were 
driven to Linton Park, which was thrown open to them by the 
kindness of Mr. F. S. W. Cornwallis. A cold collation was 
most satisfactorily served at the " Royal Star " Hotel. 

For the first time, the Annual Dinner was held in London, 
instead of in the country, at the Cafe Monico, Piccadilly, and 
was well attended. 

The following Books and Reports for 1902-3 have been 
received during the year, from — 

Croydon Natural History and Scientific Society. 

Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. 

Bulletin of the Lloyd Library. Reproduction Series No. 
3, from the " Smithsonian " Institute, Washington. 

Two Volumes from the Ray Society. 

" The Direction of Hair in Animals and Man," by Dr. 
Walter Kidd. 


i— ( 



CO cp OS 
CM CO i— I 



co CO co 

CO CM CO r— I r— I t — I i — i i — ( i — ! 




a c +■• 

ss o a) 

* «* • r! <U 

o § 





S B 

Oh 3 

Jo 5 ^ P-< <1 C/3 

j3 It! u 

3 o 0) 



O t3 




Q ° 

: T3.S 

- ho . 
: _c : 

I & 


cn & «> bo 


XH^UPh £Ph£lo 



Z I 


Hz £ 


o o 

O iO 

CO o CO 
r>- (M O 
















~ CM 

§ 8 
O rH 

os os oj 

X O 



being Abroad on the occasion 




24th February, 1904, 

Usual ADDRESS will appear 
in A 

Subsequent Report. 





Abstract of a Paper read at the Meeting of the 
Society, on 25th March, 1903. 

T is a curious fact that so many eminent workers in the 
Section of Scientific Research connected with Electri- 
cal Discharge in High Vacuo, should have missed the 
discovery of the Higher Vibrations emanating from Glass 
Tubes employed in experiments of little value except for 
pleasing lecture demonstrations. 

As far back as 1665 it was noticed that when the mercury 
column in a glass tube forming the Torricellian Barometer was 
made to rise and fall rapidly, in the empty tube above the 
mercury a greenish phosphorescence appeared in the vacuum ; 
although Frictional Electricity was then known, it was evidently 
not suspected that the attended discharge of Electricity was 
produced by the friction of the mercury. 

The published records of the work of De la Rue, Gassiot, 
Geissler, &c, all show the same " miss-fires," for if these 
workers had suspected the great secret they might have 

Sir William Crookes, the inventor of the tube which 
bears his name, failed to recognise the action of the then 
known mysterious vibrations, although they were signed on a 
photographic plate as developed shadows of fingers. Although 
Professor Rontgen undoubtedly demonstrated the chemical 
action of these Rays, Professor Jackson, of King's College, was 
lecturing before this discovery, on the penetrative power of the 
vibrations, illustrating their action on a chemical screen. 


On the public announcement of Rontgen's Discovery, in 
January, 1896, the Lecturer commenced work. In April, 1896, 
he first noticed the beneficial action of the Rays, plus the Brush 
Discharge, in alleviating Rheumatic pains, and a curious 
growth. Being impressed with the constant suggestions of the 
late Mr. T. Moore, F.R.C.S., to shorten the exposure for Skia- 
graphic purposes, he turned his attention to the Electro- 
Mollecular Tension of the discharge in the tube. 

Lecturing in 1896 for the Royal Artillery Institute at 
several centres, Mr. Webster was able to show, for the first time 
in public, the beating heart ; and suggested diagnosis of disease 
by means of the Fluorescent Screen. In December, 1896, he 
was able to take Skiagraphs in a fraction of a second, which 
the following January was perfected by the discovery of the 
Sun Condition of the tube due to tuning the vibrations, i.e., 
getting at the exact point of vacuo discharge which produced 
the most penetrative Rays. This was done by means of heating 
the cathode end of the Tube with a spirit lamp at intervals. 
During the experiments it was noticed that the discharges 
would assume the different colours of the Spectrum in turn, 
ultimately settling down to the green tint. 

From 1896-1900, he worked on the curative action of the 
Rays on various diseases, chiefly Lupus, Consumption, Cancer, 
Ichthyosis and Rodent Ulcer ; in every case alleviation followed, 
and in some cases, cures, so far as could be judged ; time only 
would prove if they were permanent. 

It is absolutely necessary, when the Tube is used, that no 
blue-coloured discharge is present, as it tends to produce 
Dermatitis, or in other words, chronic inflammation of the skin. 
There was also noticeable from the earliest work, the apparently 
more rapid healing of fractures under the influence of the Rays 
than under normal conditions. 

The ancients evidently knew more about the Laws of 
Nature and Electrical Phenomena than we gave them credit 
for ; if the Laws of Moses, evolutionised from Ancient Egyptian, 
and still older laws, were drastically carried out, disease, due to 
ignorance and sin of mankind, would not exist. 

The recently discovered Radium — or more correctly speak- 
ing — Bromide of Radium, seems to point to a condition of 


perpetual vibration, producing all the Phenomena in an 
accentuated form, of the healing properties of the so-called 
X Ravs. We seem to be on the verge of a series of marvellous 
discoveries opening out possibilities of a character which mav 
revolutionise many theories. 

In reference to the working of the apparatus, it was ex- 
plained that manv new inventions relating to mechanical 
makes-and-breaks for the Coil, undoubtedly simplified accurate 
Skiagraphy-, and that the different conditions of the tube, 
produced bv more or less rapid bombardment of the Anode, 
would undoubtedly lead to more perfect application and under- 
standing of the Rays in disease. It was necessary for the 
worker to take care not to be exposed to the action of the Rays 
lor any length of time, as the continued action might result, not 
only in shedding of nails and permanent skin complaint, but 
even in the sloughing of limbs, and nervous disturbances ; if 
published cases and personal experience are to be taken as 
unpleasant facts. 





Read at the Meeting of the Society on 22nd April, 1903. 

(j[iJOR about a quarter of a century I have resided more or 
J* less continuously in the grounds of " The Cedars," at 
Lee, a suburban oasis of some forty acres, belonging to 
Mrs. Penn, so laid out that several generations have 
here learned to excel at our national games, and yet sufficiently 
wooded to attract and protect a small portion of the animal life 
that haunts the great Metropolis. So close to London that on 
an extra still night you may catch a weird echo of sonorous Big 
Ben, and yet so far afield that you may perhaps at the same 
time be charmed by the loud clear notes of a nightingale, or be 
startled by the harsh scream of an owl. Here, as elsewhere, it 
has been my delight to make notes on all matters appertaining 
to Natural History, and I therefore give this detailed account of 
such local fauna as I have seen, so that when the ever-advancing 
phalanx of bricks and mortar shall have invaded this sylvan 
spot, a record shall be to hand describing the feathered inmates 
of the past. 

I must mention that " West Lodge " is a house we built in 
" The Cedars' " grounds, in 1877, at the opposite end of the 
grounds to " The Cedars " itself. I must also say that I added 
a few notes to this paper after reading it. 

1. — Mistle Thrush (Turdus Viscivorus). 

This, the largest of our three resident thrushes, is also the 
shyest, both as regards choosing a site for its nest, and approach- 
ing man's habitations. On one of our tennis lawns at " West 
Lodge " I have frequently seen five or six Mistle Thrushes at a 


time, and been particularly struck with the remarkable varia- 
tions in their plumage, a well-known peculiarity, I believe. 

On March 30th, 1901, walking with H. F. Witherby through 
the grounds, we noticed a Starling sitting tight in a Mistle's 
nest. My friend climbed up to investigate, but the nest was 
empty, and I had no opportunity of examining it again. 

2. — Song Thrush (Turdus Musicus). 

A resident that breeds regularly all over the grounds. It is 
always pleasant to hear the beautiful notes of this bird, but they 
appear to me only to sing in earnest from the end of February to 
the middle of July. Down at " The Cedars' " pond I noticed a 
nest with four eggs in, on the 12th March, 1893. This means 
first egg on the 9th. 

On March 6th, 1903, I found fluttering along in "The 
Cedars' " orchard a young Thrush just out of its nest. This 
meant the first egg about February 5th, which is, of course, 
abnormally early. 

On June 16th, 1903, Joan (Mrs. Bowles) and I noticed a 
Thrush with a pure white head feeding on the soaked bread 
always laid down on "The Cedars' " lawn. On July 1st, 1903, 
I saw a Thrush take a stag-beetle. The beetle was sort of 
hawking round our ivy geraniums at " West Lodge,'' an enor- 
mous fellow, when out dashed a Thrush, swept him on to the 
lawn tennis ground, hammered him, and flew off with the corpse. 

3. — Redwing (Turdus IUacus). 

A winter visitor at " The Cedars," arriving about the middle 
of November, and leaving in February. 

4. — Fieldfare (Turdus Pilaris). 

A winter visitor at " The Cedars," that comes and goes 
with the Redwing. Easily distinguished from all the other 
Thrushes by the dark patch on back, particularly noticeable as 
they fly away. 

5. — Blackbird (Turdus Mcrula). 

One of the finest songsters in the world. To my mind the 
nearest approach to its rich tone is the magnificent warble of 


the Australian Magpie {Cr actions Tibicen), which bird, however, 
to be properly appreciated, must be heard in its native bush, as 
it picks up so many false notes in captivity. 

Every year at " West Lodge " we have several Blackbirds 
with more or less white about them. On December 22nd, 1902, 
a Blackbird appeared on our lawn, and stayed for months, with 
the right quill feather white, two round patches on back the 
size of half-a-crown, speckled with white over head and neck, 
and white under the wings, which I seldom see as it rarely flies. 
I notice these pied birds are avoided by others of the same 
species, are tame, found in close proximity to dwelling houses, 
and are of the male sex. Both males and females keep to them- 
selves in winter, and are very pugnacious one to the other. 

The earliest nest I have seen here was March 19th, 1903. 
It had one egg in. 1893 was an extraordinary year. Summer 
began the beginning of March and lasted until October. 

6. — Ring Ouzel (Turdus Torquatus). 

On 9th October, 1902, my youngest daughter found one of 
these birds in the Camelia house at " The Cedars," half-choked 
by a berry that had stuck in its mouth. It lived happily in one 
of our avaries for several days, feeding voraciously on worms, 
but, unfortunately, succumbed eventually to a mysterious fit. 
This bird was no doubt attracted down to " The Cedars' " 
grounds during its migration. It was a fine male bird, 11 \ 
inches total length, 5J wing. 

7. — Redbreast (Erithactis Rubecula). 

I cannot imagine these grounds without several Robins 
taking the greatest interest in one's proceedings. I well remem- 
ber an old Nurse who often sat with her charges on one 
particular bench in the woods. A little light food was always 
produced, and for years a Robin took its regular place on the 
bench alongside the party. 

I have known innumerable Robins' nests in " The Cedars' " 
grounds, in cowsheds, in the ivy on the house, in the ivy on the 
ground, and with eggs differing in the same clutch to an 
extraordinary extent. 

8. — Nightingale (Daulias Lusinia). 

A summer visitor, but I myself have not heard a Nightin- 
gale at the Cedars since 1877. They were then fairly numerous, 



especially down at the pond, and their loud clear note greatly 
enhanced the pleasure of sitting out on " The Cedars' " lawn on 
a warm spring evening. 

Driving from " West Lodge " to Sidcup, on May 4th, I 
heard my first 1901 Nightingale, so they are not very far off. 
Indeed, I am told that they still visit "The Cedars'" grounds 
for a day or two every year. 

I have seen a great many Nightingales' nests on the ground, 
or in nettles a few inches up, but have never yet seen an egg 
vary in the very least from the olive green type. 

9. — Whitethroat (Sylvia Cinevea). 
A summer visitor, which I feel sure nests at "The Cedars." 

10. — Lesser Whitethroat (Sylvia Curruca). 
Another summer visitor to "The Cedars." 

11. — Blackcap (Sylvia Atricapilla). 

Another summer visitor. On May 4th, 1901, my daughter 
found a nest, by " The Cedars' " pond, with two eggs in it. The 
little bird with black head, sitting so defiantly for half the day, 
soon convinced us it was the Blackcap's nest. The female, with 
reddish-brown coloured head was on the nest the other half of 
the day. Before leaving " West Lodge " for the country, 21st 
May, 1901, I paid a visit to this nest, and found five young birds 
with the mother in attendance. This is the fourth Blackcap's 
nest I have been able to watch right through, and note how both 
the birds take their share in sitting. 

On 25th May, 1903, by " The Cedars' " pond, I came across 
a Blackcap's nest with an unfledged young one and one egg in. 
The old bird rolled over at my feet, pretending to be wounded. 
It is curious how these " Cedars'" birds sit on so short a clutch. 

12. — Garden Warbler (Sylvia Hortensis). 

Another summer visitor. I found a nest by the pond at 
" The Cedars," 10th May, 1904, in a rose tree, with two eggs ; 
unfortunately, someone took both nest and eggs. On 18th Mav, 
1899, I saw and heard one down at the pond. They are very 
difficult birds to locate. The eggs closelv resemble S. A tvicapilhi. 
with rather a dirtier tinge. 


13. — Golden-Crested Wren (Regulus Cristatus). 

This, the smallest of all British birds, and I think the most 
restless, is an occasional visitor to " The Cedars' " grounds. I 
well remember one being shot here with a catapult, to the great 
grief of the marksman, who never imagined he could hit it. 

On 12th July, 1885, I watched three playing about on a 
cedar tree, in fact the very cedar from which the grounds take 
their name. This tree is a gigantic old male, and some 150 yards 
off is an equally enormous female, and tradition has it, that their 
roots meet midway, and are lovingly entwined one round the 

14. — Chiffchaff (Philoscopus Rufus). 

When at " West Lodge " I generally hear this welcome little 
visitor heralding the approach of summer about the beginning 
of April. The 30th March, 1896, is my earliest date here. 

On May 17th, 1901, I photographed a Cedars' Chiffchaff, 
but in justice to the bird destroyed the print. 

15. — Willow Wren (Philoscopus Trochilus). 

A summer visitor, coming and going with the other warblers. 
" West Lodge," 3rd April, 1899 ; 18th May, 1899 ; 8th April, 
1901 ; 26th April, 1903, &c. 

I am confident this little bird builds down by "The 
Cedars'" pond, but then its nest is sometimes so difficult to find, 
although sometimes so easy. 

16. — Hedge Sparrow (Accentor Modularis) 

A resident of " The Cedars," and nests there freely. It is 
a wonder to me this bird ever brings off its young, so carelessly 
placed is its nest, and so conspicuous are the blue eggs. 

I remember one in the broad walk at " The Cedars " in a 
holly, about six inches from the ground, with eggs visible about 
ten yards off, yet it hatched off four eggs, 24th May, 1898. 

On April 24th, 1903, there was a nest with two eggs in 
" The Cedars' " privet hedge, which, I hope, hatched off all right. 


17. — Great Titmouse (Parus Major). 

These bold little birds suddenly appear at " The Cedars," 
in considerable numbers about the middle of February. 

18. — Coal Titmouse (Parus Britannicus). 

Harry Witherby and I watched a pair for a long time play- 
on a birch tree at " The Cedars' " pond, 8th April, 1903. 

This Bird is peculiar to the British Isles. 

19. — Blue Titmouse (Partis Cceruleus). 

A resident. On 11th April, 1901, I found the Nuthatch's 
hole in the orchard, at " The Cedars," was taken possession of by a 
pair of Blue Tits. On 28th January, 1903, I watched one of these 
birds laboriously ring-barking the twigs of an elm on " The 
Cedars' " cricket ground. I often wondered what it was 
that destroyed the twigs and ends of small branches, causing 
them to stand out conspicuously and disfiguringly ugly. No 
doubt the birds do it while hunting for insects. 

They appear here at the end of January, and pair off the 
middle of February. They nested in a big holly opposite " West 
Lodge " drawing room, 1903. 

20. — Nuthatch (Sitta Ccesia). 

This beautiful little bird is a visitor that breeds abundantly 
at " The Cedars." On 8th April, 1898, I watched one for along 
time plastering mud round the hole in a tree I have known them 
nest in. On the 18th, I saw the Nuthatch go into the hole, and 
we then left for the country. On 11th April, 1901, I found a 
pair of Blue Tits had taken possession of this same hole. It is 
strange that this tree should be so popular, as all through the 
spring it supports one end of the rope on which "The Cedars'" 
carpets are beaten. 

At " West Lodge," 28th July, 1892, I saw three Nuthatches 
taking flies off an oak tree I had sugared overnight. 

This bird can hunt a tree trunk both up and down, differing 
in this respect from the Tree Creeper, which can only work up.. 

21.— Wren (Troglodytes Parvulus). 

A resident that nests freely at "The Cedars." In May. 
1903, a Wren built its oval little nest on the railway running 


through " The Cedars." The trains, some sixty a day, must 
have continually passed within a yard of it. 

I think these birds build more nests than they ever intend 
to use. I have so many that come to nothing. The saying is, 
" If you put your finger in a Wren's nest that has no eggs in, 
the birds will surely desert," so perhaps this may partly account 
for their superabundance. At the same time no bird sits tighter 
if it has laid a few eggs and means business. 

22. — Tree Creeper (Certhia Familiaris). 

At " The Cedars " there are really three species of birds 
which creep up trees, viz., Nuthatch, Lesser-spotted Wood- 
pecker, and Tree Creeper, and yet they all go about their work 
differently. I have watched this bird often, and it always seem 
to me to work most carefully up a tree and then drop like a leaf 
to the bottom and commence again on another side. The same 
with a branch : it works up it, and then flies across to the root 
of another, and always choosing a living branch. Perhaps its 
long tail, which seems to cling to the bark, might be out of 
place and even top-heavy for a downward journey. 

The bird is a resident here, and on 24th April, 1898, 1 found 
a beautiful little nest, inside the bark of a fir tree, down by 
"The Cedars' " pond, which I believe hatched off all right. 

23. — Pied Wagtail (Motacilla Lugubris). 

A summer visitor that regularly arrives on the lawn at 
"The Cedars" about April 22nd, probably from the South of 
England. In May they are generally accompanied by one or 
two young ones. I think this is the smallest British bird that 
walks and runs. 

This year (1903) I saw a solitary specimen feeding on the 
lawn, February 21st ; this was much earlier than usual. It was 
there every day until March 11th, when a mate appeared, and 
the pair continued to haunt " The Cedars' " lawn. Very black 
and white, as they always are in spring. 

On 6th April, 1903, a pair appeared at " West Lodge " as 
well, and I saw another pair down at the pond, which is unusual. 


On 4th August, 1903, I noticed a very dark and very light- 
coloured Pied Wagtail on " The Cedars' " lawn, old and young 
one I suppose, but the dark one declined to feed the light one. 
They were the same size. 

They nest every year over "The Cedars' " drawing-room 
window. On 5th May, 1895, we found a very young one 
strolling about on " The Cedars' " lawn, so, for fear of cats, put 
him in a cage on a branch, and his parents fed him through 
the bars. 

24. — Pied Flycatcher {Muscicapa Atricapilla). 

I have only seen this bird once in my life, and that was at 
" The Cedars," 6th May, 1888. It has so striking an appearance 
(like a small Magpie in fact) that I first noticed it from our 
drawing-room window, at a distance of fully 200 yards. Creeping 
quietly up through the woods I got a good view of it, and its 
habits appeared to be similar to M. Grisola. 

25. — Spotted Flycatcher {Muscicapa Grisola). 

Another summer visitor, generally arriving on " The 
Cedars' " lawn with the Wagtails. They love to perch on the 
backs of the numerous benches and chairs dotted all about, from 
which points of vantage they make small raids on the insects 

On 3rd June, 1903, I came across a nest in the fork of a 
silver birch at "The Cedars'" pond, with four eggs. They 
hatched off all right. 

26. — Swallow (Hirundo Rustica) 

During the twenty-five years I have lived at " West Lodge," 
only once did the swallows take possession of the eaves, and 
build round the house. Unfortunately, the reception they met 
with from the overwhelming mass of useless sparrows that live 
luxuriously on the good things provided for fowls, pheasants, 
pigeons, &c, was evidently too much for them. 

Every spring that I am at kt West Lodge " I welcome and 
write down their arrival, i.e., the first I happen to see myself, 
and I think the earliest is 14th April, ] 900. Every year they 
build in kk The Cedars' " stables, under the bridge at the pond, 
and in our cowshed at tk West Lodge," to the last of which I 
have often watched them carrying small pieces of mud. 


27. — House Martin (Chelidon Urbica). 

This welcome little visitor generally arrives at "The Cedars " 
with the swallow, sometimes a day or two earlier. 

28. — Greenfinch (Ligurinus Chloris). 

At " The Cedars" I can only remember one nest, in a holly 
near the house, and on 24th April, 1895, the sitting bird let me 
remove five eggs from under her (I was searching for a Cuckoo's 
egg), merely pecking my finger as I carefully replaced them. I 
therefore conclude the Greenfinch is not a shy bird. 

I saw a pair down by " The Cedars' " pond on 4th March, 
1903, and several times afterwards. The female was much the 
dullest in colour. 

29. — Hawfinch (Coccothraustes Vulgaris) 

For all I know, Hawfinches may have haunted " The 
Cedars " for years, but my own personal experience of them 
commences 4th March, 1898, when I saw from " The Cedars' " 
billiard-room window what to me seemed a strange bird, hopping 
about with the starlings and sparrows. Perhaps the following 
extract that I wrote to a local paper will best explain the whole 
circumstance : — 

" I have for many years kept a list of our local birds, but to 
my ornithological friends and myself the Hawfinch (Cocco- 
thraustes Vulgaris) is new in this locality. One first made its 
appearance on our front lawn on 2nd March, 1898. On the 6th, 
it was accompanied by what I take to be a female, as it had not 
such bright glossy plumage as its companion. On the 24th, four 
appeared, the two strangers being, I should think, two young of 
last year, as they showed no white on the tips of their tails, and 
were altogether slightly immature looking. The old male 
appears by itself nearly every afternoon, always feeding, some- 
times picking something off the grass, at other times eating the 
holly berries. It clips off the prickly leaves if they are in the 
way, mouths about a berry, and finally, having eaten the pips, 
drops the skin nearly whole to the ground. All this I watch 
through glasses from " The Cedars' " billiard-room window. It 
moves about like a mechanical toy, with little spasmodic hops, 
and flies like a very pronounced Chaffinch. It has short pink 
legs, tarsi, and feet, and its wings, when folded, just clear the 
pure white at the tip of the tail. When flying, it shows the 


white on wing-coverts and primaries very distinctly. It is about 
the size of a small Starling, but is shaped more like a Parrot 
than one of our English Finches. I hope they have come to 

On 10th April, 1900, I saw another Hawfinch on one of the 
great hollies at " West Lodge " (in days gone by, on the spot 
now occupied by " West Lodge " stood a house called " The 
Hollies "), and on 15th June, 1903, I saw a splendid <? at " The 
Cedars," hammering at a hawberry under a thorn tree. On 
going to the tree, I noticed a berry lodged in the bark, and 
several remains on the ground. 

30. — House Sparrow (Passer Domesticus). 

At " West Lodge," these little pests are increasing to an 
alarming extent, as they abhor the dangers of migration, and 
decline even a trip across " The Cedars' " grounds. They delight 
to steal the food intended for our fowls, pheasants, pigeons, 
rabbits, and other superior creatures. Worse than this, they 
drive away all such interesting birds as Swallows, Martins, Wag- 
tails, Tits, Finches, &c, at least to the best of their ability. 

We grow crocuses, &c, in a haphazard sort of fashion on 
the various lawns, but the Sparrows love plucking the leaves off 
the flowers directly they appear, especially the yellow variety. 
They also love to build their untidy apology for a nest in all 
such pipes and eaves as are specially constructed to carry off 
rain-water. These they block, and so cause an endless amount 
of trouble and expense. They are, in fact, one of mankind's 
most useless and expensive parasites, and are increasing all 
over the country. On 24th June, 1903, I counted 171 on the 
fence of our " West Lodge " tennis lawn. On their behalf I 
must say I have frequently noticed how remarkably fussy they 
are over their offspring, especially the cock bird. Summing 
them up, I should say the House Sparrow runs no risks. 

31. — Tree Sparrow [Passer Montamis). 

On 13th May, 1895, I picked up an egg by "The Cedars' " 
front door, which was being attacked by a House Sparrow ; it 
puzzled us all ; a smudge of brown the large end, and the rest 
white. I sent it up to the B.O.U., and they said it was a variety 
of the Tree Sparrow, and asked me to get some more. I hunted, 
but in vain. 


In the Tree Sparrow, the sexes are alike in plumage. The 
crown and nape are reddish-brown instead of grey, as in the 
cock House Sparrow. There are also two distinct bands of 
white on the wing instead of one, as in the House Sparrow. 

They are not quite such stay-at-homes as P. Domesticus. 

An eminent entomologist once asked me to let him know if 
I ever saw a Sparrow take a white butterfly. I was able to let 
him know I saw a Tree Sparrow take P. Rapce, on the wing, at 
" West Lodge," 4th June, 1899. 

32. — Chaffinch (Fringilla C celebs). 

These pretty little birds appear at " West Lodge " about 
the 14th February, the females arriving first, and a few always 
stay to breed. I remember an exceptionally neat little nest in 
" The Cedars," by Love Lane, 23rd April, 1895, in a most 
exposed position. I used often to pass it, and see the little 
occupant sitting tight, and showing no sign of fear ; but one day, 
to my sorrow, nest and all had disappeared. 

On 10th May, 1903, we found an unusually small nest in an 
old thorn at " West Lodge." The hen Chaffinch was sitting on 
two very small eggs. On the 21st she deserted, and the eggs 
turned out to be addled. On the 30th she came back to the 
nest, laid five eggs, and hatched them all. I think it was the 
same bird, she was so uncommonly small. 

I have long remarked how these birds delight to fly in front 
of a horse and trap : perhaps for the insects that are put up. 

33. — Linnet (Linota Cannabina). 

I have read somewhere that birds will not nest in privet. 
Nevertheless, 14th May, 1902, I found at " The Cedars," in a 
hedge of this description, a Linnet's nest with four eggs in, all 
of which hatched off successfully. 

34. — Bullfinch (Pyrrhula Europcea). 

I have often seen Bullfinches in " The Cedars' " grounds, 
but have never noticed a nest. A pair this spring (1903) haunt 
the pond, which looks like business. I saw the female first, 
January 27th, and the pair on April 17th. 


r On 26th September, 1902, a magnificent male pitched on 
the lawn at " West Lodge," right opposite the drawing-room 
window, but was immediately driven away by Sparrows. 

35. — Starling (Sturnus Vulgaris). 

An increasing resident, that breeds freely in the old elms 
and oaks at both " The Cedars " and " West Lodge." On 2nd 
February, 1898, I counted 33 feeding on " The Cedars' " lawn. 
Nearly every year I pick up one or more eggs on the lawns, and 
this indiscriminate laying of this particular bird I have noticed 
in many other districts. Taking a few cases at " West Lodge," 
I notice 13th April, 1893 ; 13th April, 1894 ; 17th May, 1896, 
and 29th May, 1897. 

On 29th March, 1899, I saw a Starling drop off a high tree 
at " West Lodge." I picked it up and it seemed dead, but hold- 
ing the bird in my hand for about a quarter of an hour it entirely 
recovered and flew away. 

A Starling with half its tail-feathers white came to " The 
Cedars' " bread, 4th August, 1903, and I saw it there again on 
October 11th. 

36. — Jay) Garrulus Glandarius). 

Why I should see a Jay at " The Cedars " I really do not 
know, but such is the case, 27th October, 1894 ; 22nd April, 1899, 
&c, and on most friendly terms with the Rooks. I am afraid, 
however, we must put it down in the list of escaped birds, such 
as the Magpie that came and fed on " The Cedars' " lawn, the 
Canary we all saw 10th March, 1898, and the Cockatoo that 
suddenly appeared in the sky, and flew down on the cage of our 
old favourite " Cockie," placed out on " The Cedars' " lawn one 
sweltering Sunday afternoon. 

37. — Magpie (Pica Rustica). 

One occasionally comes down to the plentifully supplied 
birds' food on " The Cedars' " lawn. I expect some escaped 

I believe the Magpie is the only species of the Corvidcc 
that hops. 


38. — Jackdaw (Corvus Monedula). 

An undesirably increasing resident here, and, I expect, 

We have an albino in one of the " West Lodge " aviaries. 

39. — Red-backed Shrike (Lanius Collurio). 

On 3rd August, 1903, I saw a splendidly-marked male on 
the back net of our " West Lodge " tennis grounds. It caught 
several large insects (probably bees) off the flower beds while I 
was watching it, always flying back to the net. Having swallowed 
them, it plumed itself with great deliberation. On my approach- 
ing it flew away with a wary fly, showing a white patch on tail- 

40. — Carrion Crow (Corvus Cor one). 
An occasional visitor at "The Cedars." 

On 11th December, 1902, my youngest daughter, laid up 
with measles, sent down to me to say she heard a strange note 
outside her window, which, however, reminded her of another 
note she knew. It turned out to be a Carrion Crow, which 
reminded her of a tame Royston she once had. Up to March, 
1903, we frequently heard its shouting call, much deeper and 
louder than the Rook's, though in several different keys. 

On 15th March, 1903, I saw a pair feeding with the Rooks 
off the usual bread breakfast placed on " The Cedars' " lawn, 
and frequently after. They are slimmer and more active than 
the Rooks, whom they drive here, there, and everywhere. One 
of the pair shouted the usual cry on March 30th, when on "The 
Cedars' " lawn, five or six times in quick succession, bowing to 
each call. I hope they mean to nest here. 

41. — Rook (Corvus Frugilegus). 

The rookery at " The Cedars " is a very ancient affair, and 
although the inhabitants take our vegetables and fruit and dig 
up our tennis lawns, I trust they will long be able to keep their 
little colony together. Every year they go through the same 
routine. About February 1st they begin to repair the old nests, 
which through the winter months have been used for roosting 
places for Tits and other small birds. The old Rooks show 


great ingenuity in flying round and round to twist off twigs and 
small branches for this purpose. They appear in pairs all over the 
grounds at the end of February, and the females take possession 
of their respective nests in March, and make a sort of choking 
guttural note, exactly like the young ones will do in April ; the 
males kissing and feeding them as they sit on the nests or on 
the ground, and this long before any eggs are laid. One pecu- 
liarity of this rookery is the small number of eggs to a full clutch. 
Of late years I have frequently tested this, and never counted 
more than four. On 5th April, 1901, I examined three clutches 
containing three, two, and two eggs, from nests built away from 
the main rookery, and all the eggs were hard sat on. Probably 
the clutches are so small because the Rooks are unable to get 
sufficient food, partly because they have increased so in numbers, 
and partly because new buildings have appeared in so many of 
their old feeding grounds. I have frequently seen them take 
birds' eggs, and Harry Witherby watched one take all four, one 
after another, in a sly suspicious manner, out of a Mistle's nest. 

In March, 1901, we commenced to play hockey on the now 
disused cricket ground. The large elms overshadowing the 
ground contained the usual Rooks' nests. The occupants, 
however, failed to appreciate this game, and bodily removed 
their nests across the railway to the " West Lodge " side of the 

On 15th March, 1903, I saw the males feeding the females 
on " The Cedars' " lawn with bread, the females uttering the 
cackling cry like young ones. 

During the fearful gale of 24th March, 1895, a number of 
" The Cedars' " Rooks' nests were blown clean away. 

42. — Swift (Cypselus A pus). 
I remember one at " West Lodge," May 15th, 1898. 

43. — Wryneck (lynx Torquilla). 

This appropriately-named bird is an occasional visitor at 
" The Cedars," where it creeps about the tree trunks like a 

I had a good long view of one at " The Cedars " on 3rd April, 
1896, and Harry Witherby had an equally long view at " West 
Lodge" on 17th May, 1901. Its note is a striking one, though 


rather difficult to describe. It sounds to me like " oe " uttered 
twelve or thirteen times rather quickly in the same key, then a 
long pause, then off again. 

The gardeners at " The Cedars " heard one calling this 
year (1903) on 1st May. 

44. — Lesser Spotted Woodpecker (Dendrocopus Minor). 

We often see and hear this pretty little bird in " The 
Cedars' " grounds. On 19th April, 1896, I watched a pair for a 
long time. They were playing a sort of " hide and seek." 

45. — Green Woodpecker (Picus Viridis). 

On the railway side of the pond, in an old birch, is cer- 
tainly an old hole made by P. Viridis. Still stranger, there 
appears to be one now (27th May, 1903,) being made in the same 
tree, and, strangest of all, H. Leibenrood is certain he saw one 
hammering away in the wood at "West Lodge" on 10th May, 

46. — Kingfisher (Alcedo Ispida). 

I think this lovely little bird is more than a winter visitor 
to " The Cedars' " pond, though I have never been able to locate 
its nest. 

On 19th December, 1898, Harry Witherby told me our 
usual pair had been shot, and were being set up by a local tax- 
idermist. I was unable to trace the offender, but fortunately, 
on 19th July, 1899, saw two more that had taken up the vacant 

Mr. Webster says a pair often visits the pond, in Greenwich 
Park, fishing quietly from the overhanging branches, and then 
fly back with their prey to " The Cedars' " pond. This confirms 
my opinion of their nesting with us. 

47. — Cuckoo (Cuculus Canorns). 

A regular summer visitant to " The Cedars," though, un- 
fortunately, we hear less and less of it every succeeding year. I 
think 18th April, 1895, is the earliest recorded in my diary, 
although every year they appear about that date. 

On 10th May, 1901, I saw one flying across our field, and 
calling out " cuck, cuck, cuck " very loud. This call I always 


associate with an egg, so I hunted everywhere, but without 

This year (1903) I first heard it at " West Lodge" on 
May 10th. 

48. — Barn Owl (Strix Flammed). 

A resident at " The Cedars." I often see them flit noise- 
lessly by while we sit out at "West Lodge" watching the 
Crystal Palace fireworks. At other times we hear them screech- 
ing one to the other. Its cry is a sort of scream. Particularly 
did I notice the way they answered one another, 19th July, 1901, 
right across the grounds. Our night watchman reports that he 
sees them sitting in quite a friendly way alongside the pigeons ; 
often a pair of them, and once as many as five ; no doubt 
watching for mice. 

49. — Tawny Owl (Syrnium Aliwa). 

The tawny owl when young utters " too- whit " over and 
over and over again. This note we often hear on a July evening 
at "The Cedars," and this year (1903) on July 12th, I located 
two nests in the great elms on " The Cedars' " lawn. When 
mature it has a prolonged whistle on a running down scale, 
which causes it to sound like a child in distress. This is followed, 
after a short interval, by exactly the same note on the running 
down scale, only in a tremolo. 

We often hear the old birds ; this year as early as March 
1st ; the prolonged tremolo sounding above the Church bells, 
railway trains, and howling wind. 

50. — Sparrow Hawk (Accipiter Nisus) 

Another occasional visitor to " The Cedars." Some ten 
years ago one became almost a fixture here in the spring, finding 
my chickens easier to take away than wild birds. 

On 18th April, 1900, at "The Cedars," I saw one sailing 
round and round the house ; and 16th October, 1899, an 
unusually large female came quite close to " West Lodge." 

51. — Peregrine Falcon (Falco Peregrinus). 

On 22nd March, 1896, Frank Penn, Eric Penn, and myself 
watched one for a considerable time circling over "The Cedars' " 


pond. From its size we judged it to be a female ; the Falcon 
in hawking parlance, as distinguished from the inferior Tiercel 

Its appearance so near London is not unusual, nor indeed 
extraordinary, as the water fowl on a suburban lake would prove 
a powerful attraction to a bird who thinks nothing of travelling 
fifty miles to procure a breakfast (hence, of course, the name 
Pevegrinus). It is, in fact, frequently asserted that these birds 
never seek their prey in the vicinity of their own nests, and 
certain it is that all sorts of smaller birds nest in safety along- 
side them. 

52. — Kestrel (Falco Tinnunculus). 

A frequent visitor to " The Cedars' " grounds, sometimes 
hovering close to " West Lodge," and preparatory, I always 
hope, to a raid on the mice which swarm ; for although the 
fields and woods harbour a multitude of semi-wild, half-starved 
cats, those poaching quadrupeds appear to draw the line at mice. 

53. — Cormorant (Phalacrocorax Carbo). 

Certainly a very occasional visitor. Harry Witherby tells 
me he once saw seven flying over the Heath. My single example 
was on 9th April, 1901, and it flew slowly over "The Cedars'" 

54. — Heron (Ardea Cinerea). 

Another occasional visitor, although much more friendly 
disposed than the Cormorant ; in fact they often pay us a visit, 
confining themselves, however, to the pond. On 11th October, 
1902, I saw one halfway up the field with our white-fronted 

Dr. Staples, whose house overlooks the pond, says his 
children often see one there. On 25th April, 1900, a pair flew 
over our heads during a most exciting hockey match on " The 
Cedars' " ground. 

55. — White-fronted Goose (Anser Albifrons). 

On 12th July, 1899, I took six down to " The Cedars' " 
pond. They were the descendants of a pair F. Penn bought at 
Leadenhall Market, and took to Benacre. They live very 


happily at " The Cedars," and stroll about, making their loud 
trumpeting cry. Grass and weeds are their favourite food. They 
fly all over the place, but always return to the pond at night. 
Mr. Frohawk (of The Field) wrote a long article in that paper, 
on 5th July, 1902, about these birds, as he was very much 
interested in their having bred here. 

The bill and feet of a gosling are greenish black. 

56. — Wild Duck {Anas Boscas). 

I have a Mallard in my collection that Frank Penn shot at 
" The Cedars' " pond. 

57. — Wood Pigeon {Columba Palumbus). 

A rapidly increasing resident at " The Cedars/' and as 
neither birds or eggs are interfered with, this will continue. 

On 14th May, 1899, I counted fifty on the field by the pond, 
creeping about as if they had no legs. On 5th May, 1901, I saw 
a Wood Pigeon sitting on its nest by the pond in a small spruce, 
not seven feet from the ground. More like the site of a Turtle 

58. — Stock Dove {Columba CBnas). 

A visitor, though I knew one pair that regularly built in a 
hole in a dead oak at " West Lodge." For a long time we left 
the tree on their account, although it w r as a decided eyesore, 
being right opposite the drawing-room window. One year a cat 
cleared them out, and added insult to injury by using the hole 
as a nursery on her own account, so we cut the tree down. 

In an enormous old ash tree by " The Cedars' " pond, there 
is a hole near which I have seen and heard an Owl, but on 30th 
March, 1901, it was taken possession of by a Stock Dove. 

59. — Turtle Dove {Turtur Communis). 

On 1st June, 1908, one appeared on our "West Lodge" 
tennis lawn. It was busy feeding on something or other. It 
finally flew into the tall elms opposite " West Lodge," showing 
the white tips to its tail-feathers as it flew. 


60. — Pheasant (Phasianus Colchicus). 

I have several times seen a Cock Pheasant down by the pond, 
and on 18th June, 1893, one came right up to " West Lodge," 
knowing, of course, it was perfectly safe, for what animal in the 
whole wide world is so cunning as an old cock Pheasant ? 

61. — Partridge {Perdix Cinerea) 

I have often seen Partridges at " The Cedars," but on 6th 
April, 1901, while playing hockey, we put one up at our very 
feet, but I have never come across a nest in the grounds. 

There is, I think, only one visible difference in the sexes, 
viz., the light-coloured crossbars in the feathers of the wing- 
coverts of the female, which are entirely absent in the male, 
though both have the light-coloured bar down the middle of 
each feather. To be able to tell a young red-leg is sometimes 
useful, as an old bird generally goes wrong in the legs, and an 
old red-leg can be bought in the market for a shilling, and the 
ordinary test is the gouty-looking legs. Well, young birds some- 
times go wrong in the legs too, yet are classed as old ones. If, 
however, you know the difference (as the legs do not affect their 
eating qualities) you can make a good bargain. It is that the 
tip of the longest quill-feather is golden. This only lasts the 
one year. 

62. — Landrail (Crex Pratensis). 

I have several times heard this bird at " The Cedars," but 
never been able to locate it. It is certainly a ventriloquist. 

63. — Moorhen {Gallinula Chloropus). 

A resident. On 3rd January, 1900, one spent a considerable 
time on our lawn tennis ground. I once saw one fly over a train 
by the pond, and fall dead, evidently killed by the steam of the 

On 8th January, 1903, I saw a Moorhen at " The Cedars' " 
pond with a small live fish in its mouth. It kept putting it down, 
and then the fish flapped. It finally carried the fish into the 

I often see small dace half alive at "The Cedars' " pond in 
the winter. I expect it was one of these. 


64. — Golden Plover (Charadrius Pluvialis). 

A winter visitor, but I have only seen three in " The 
Cedars' " grounds. They flew over " West Lodge," from 
Granville Park way, on 3rd May, 1901. 

65. — Lapwing (Vanellus Vulgaris). 

On 4th November, 1900, I saw a flock of twenty-one fly 
over " West Lodge " at 9 a.m. 

66. — Woodcock (Scolopax Rusticula). 

I once saw a Woodcock down at " The Cedars' " pond. 
Being evidently a wounded bird, Frank Penn shot it, and I have 
it now in my collection. 

On the 14th October, 1902, we were playing hockey on " The 
Cedars' " ground, and Frank Sutton saw one fly right over our 
heads. He is a keen sportsman, and was quite certain of his 

67. — Common Sandpiper (Totamis Hypoleucus). 

An occasional visitor to " The Cedars' " pond. I saw a 
couple there on 29th April, 1899, and Alfred Penn shot one 
another time that I have now. 

68. — Common Gull (Lams Ccrnus). 

On 19th August, 1886, a company of twelve flew solemnly 
over " West Lodge." 

69. — Little Grebe (Podicipes Nigricollis). 

On 1st April, 1894, a gardener brought me a dead specimen 
that he had picked up in the orchard at " The Cedars." It had 
a hole in it, as if some bird of prey (perhaps a Peregrine, our 
friend of 22nd March, 1896) had struck it, flown off with it, and 
dropped it. 

They have been reported at " The Cedars' " pond. 





Abstract of a Paper read at the Meeting of the 
Society, on 27th May, 1903. 

The paper dealt principally with the three chief families of 
the Entozoa, viz. : — The Cestoda, the Trematoda, and the 

As examples of the first group, Taenia Mediocanellata, Taenia 
Solium, Bothriocephalus Latus, and Taenia Echinococcus were taken. 
Specimens of these various forms were shown, and the anatomy 
and methods of reproduction explained with the help of 
diagrams. The life-history, with its marked alternation of 
generations, was traced from the egg of a ripe proglottis to the 
six-hooked embryo, and then to the Cysticercus or bladder 
worm developing in the first host, and giving rise to the adult 
form when introduced into the second host. 

In the case of the first three forms, man is the final host in 
which the adult worm develops, but Taenia Echinococcus only 
invades the human subject in the intermediate or Cysticercus 

The life-history was illustrated by specimens of Cysticerci 
in pork and beef, and also of a hydatid cyst (T. Echinococcus) in 
a human lung. 

The Distoma Hepaticum, Bilharzia Hcematobia, were taken 
as examples of the Trematoda. 

After a brief description of the anatomy of the Distoma 
Hepaticum, or Liver Fluke, its extremely interesting life-history 
was dealt with in some detail. Leaving the body of the sheep 
as an egg, the embryo soon develops, and this having bored its 
way into its host, the Limnceus Truncidatus, gives rise to the 


sporocyst, within which, by the first asexual generation, a new 
form of individual is developed, having a well-marked digestive 
tract, and blunt processes for propulsion. This is known as the 
Redia. The Redia in its fully developed state, gives rise by 
the second asexual generation to still another intermediate 
form, from which at length the sexually mature flukes are 
developed within a suitable host. 

Diagrams of the Bilharzia, were shown, the two sexes being 
quite distinct. The habits of the worm, and its great danger 
to man owing to its invasion of the veins of the bladder, with 
consequent production of Hematuria, were dealt with. 

Of the third family (Nematoda), Oxyuris, Ascaris Lutnbri- 
coides, Trichina Spiralis, and Ankylostoma Duodenalis were taken 
as examples. Specimens of all were shown. 

The Trichina is usually introduced into man in the encysted 
form, through eating "measly"' pork. The embryos are set 
free in the stomach, bore their way through the intestinal wall, 
and are conveyed by the blood-vessels to the muscles, where 
they encyst themselves, giving rise to much pain and trouble. 

The Ankylostoma is chiefly noted for its giving rise to what 
has been termed "miners' disease," this consists of a profound 
anaemia, with pains in the stomach, and haemorrhages from the 
bowels. It is hardly known in this country, but last year an 
outbreak occurred at Dolcoath, in Cornwall, and was shown to 
be due to this parasite. The worms cling to the inner coat of 
the Duodenum, and seem to act like leeches. They are very 
small, being but \ to J inch in length, but are capable of 
causing great damage. 


On the 25th November, 1903, 


Exhibited by the aid of Limelight, 
Taken by Him 
of THE 








Read at the Meeting of the Society, 27th Jan., 1904. 

PROTECTIVE COLOURING " appears to me to be 
a common platform on which to argue the pros and 
cons of evolution, both because we can actually see 
the principle at work for ourselves, and also because 
it admits of all those, who, like myself, hold, that life and 
its surroundings, as at present constituted, date back from 
the third verse of the first of Genesis. My object therefore in 
this Paper is to try and show that animal colouration is 
inherent, and not evolved from the "survival of the fittest," 
and I hope my idea may be considered worthy of criticism. 
I come here to learn and not to teach, and look forward to a 
discussion that may clear the ground of erroneous conclusions. 
With this preamble I will, with your permission, proceed. 

We have all of us noticed how frequently a bird that sits 
in an open nest differs in colour from her mate, and more or 
less resembles her surroundings, as for instance the females of 
the pheasants, the ducks, the blackbird, and others. 

Many of us, too, have noticed that if a bird sits in a covered 
nest she very nearly always resembles in colouring the male,, 
such for instance as the sheldrakes, tits, woodpeckers, magpie, 
bee-eater, chough, hoopoe, nuthatch, kingfisher, puffin, etc., 
amongst the conspicuously coloured birds, and the wren, tree- 
creeper, jackdaw, wryneck, starling, stock dove, and others, with 
more or less of a dowdy dress. 

Now both these cases are generally attributed to evolution. 
The first, a result of the " survival of the fittest," from protective 
colouration ; the second, as showing that in a covered nest pro- 
tective colouring is not required. But before taking this for 
granted I must mention two objections. Surely all birds who 
sit in exposed nests should be getting more and more like their 


surroundings, or be gradually dying out. There can be no 
standing still in such a theory as evolution, be the change ever 
so imperceptible. But there are no signs of evolving a pro- 
tective colouring, or of gradually dying out, in such birds as 
the swans, the geese, yellow and grey wagtails, royston, 
goldfinch, rufus sedge-warbler, waxwing, wood pigeon, jay 
(shooting a few days ago I saw five come streaming out of one 
small cover), and a host of others, the females of whom all nest in 
the open and yet wear the same conspicuous dress as the males. 
In the second example, while fully admitting that the sitting 
female in a covered nest does not require protective colouring, 
I think the most advanced evolutionist would decline to explain, 
on the principle of his theory, why the two sexes of brightly - 
coloured birds using either covered or open nests should nearly 
always resemble one another in plumage. The exceptions I 
will explain a little later on. 

The same difficulty occurs with young birds. Why should 
the young males and females be alike in plumage? And why 
always more or less resemble the mothers, even if she nests in 
the open and wears such conspicuous plumage as, say, the 
goldfinch, waxwing, jay, etc. ? For when the mother bird is off 
the nest these bright coloured little objects must attract attention 
all round ; yet they show no sign of adopting a protective colour 
or of becoming extinct. 

Again, the shadowy spots on lion cubs are nearly always 
attributed to a "throwing back " to some spotted ancestor, and 
therefore made a strong point of by the evolutionist; as how- 
ever, the lioness is similarly marked, it may merely be a case 
of the young resembling their mother in colouring. 

Again, why is it that the sexes in all animal life, whether 
of conspicuous appearance or not, that are in the habit of 
congregating together in herds, schools, colonies, flocks, shoals, 
or swarms, always resemble one another in colour, if they lead 
a monogamous life ? 

But before answering these questions and giving another 
explanation of colour, may I be permitted to digress a little, to 
try and show how, by being sometimes too ready to take things 
for granted, we may occasionally be led astray. In the life of 
Charles Darwin his son tells us that after his father's death 
they discovered that the weights used by the great man were 
wrong, and consequently many of his deductions misleading. 


Darwin had no time to test the accuracy of these weights 
himself, he took them for granted, as indeed most of us would. 

Another example occurred when I was quite young, and 
while several of us were discussing the story of the prophet 
Jonah and the whale. " A mistake somewhere " said one, " a 
whale could not possibly swallow a man." We all at once took 
this for granted, and I afterwards found the delusion confirmed 
in the footnote of an old Bible, which tried to get out of an 
imaginary difficult)' by explaining that the word also meant 
" any large fish " (though, of course, a whale is not a fish at all). 
But on reflection we all know a Sperm whale can swallow not 
only a man but a boatload of men, together with the boat, and 
curiously enough would eventually vomit them out, as in the 
case of Jonah. 

Another well-known instance of the " taken for granted 
theory," that has done incalculable harm, is, that light could 
not have been made before the sun. 

That great oceanographer, the Prince of Monaco, once told 
me that while dredging with his 50,000 metres of wire cable in 
mid-ocean, at a certain depth he came to a strata of fish with- 
out eyes, but on going deeper still, he found they had perfectly 
formed eyes ! 

Sunlight was out of the question in both depths. What 
was the light ? The very latest discovery of science may suggest 
that the Rontgen Rays and Radium were both made before the 
sun, and may perhaps be visible in certain stratas of mid-ocean. 

The next case applies to Protective Colouring, and is, I 
think, a wonderfully hard nut for an evolutionist to crack. A 
few weeks ago I was being shown some beautiful illustrations of 
coloured lepidoptera, with imago, larva, pupa, and food plants, 
executed by an artist who devotes his talent to insect life. 
Pointing to the brightly-coloured larvae of the currant moth, 
standing out conspicuously on its food plant, I said " not much 
concealment here." He, not knowing my weakness for this 
particular branch of Natural History, said " No, nor is it needed, 
for in all such cases it means the larvse are distasteful." I then 
turned to the cinnabar, the larva of which is as gaudy as that 
of the currant moth, and in fact rather resembles it, but far 
more resembles its own food plant, the common ragwort. 

Now, according to the laws of evolution (a law 7 that my 
friend the artist had taken for granted as applicable here) the 


larvae of the currant moth, showing out conspicuously on its 
food plant, should be distasteful to birds, etc., and so escape 
annihilation. On the other hand the larvae of the cinnabar, 
with a pattern and colour so exactly like the black stem and 
golden flower of the almost leafless ragwort, should by the same 
law be an eagerly-sought-after delicacy. But the exact opposite 
is the real case, as I found out by experience. The currant 
moth swarms in "The Cedars' " kitchen-garden, and to such an 
extent that we sometimes gather the larvae, and equally con- 
spicuous pupae, in baskets for our chickens, who prefer them to 
almost any other food, and yet such a conspicuous delicacy shows 
no signs of becoming extinct or of adopting more protective 

Now the cinnabar also swarms in a field I know, in Norfolk, 
that contains hardly any flora but bush upon bush of the 
common ragwort. In this huge field, and under the shade of 
these gaudy and unsightly plants, my brother-in-law used to rear 
some hundreds of young pheasants, and often we tried to tempt 
them to take for a change the larvae of the cinnabar. They 
would rush at it, but stop dead and not even peck it, so utterly 
distasteful and even poisonous must these discerning young 
pheasants know it to be. 

Clearly then in these two examples the colouration can 
claim no share in the protection of the larvae, and some other 
force than the "survival of the fittest" must be responsible for 
the likeness to surroundings. 

Dealing with another section of bird-life, viz., their eggs, 
we soon find evolution again at fault. It is true very many 
clutches resemble their surroundings, especially when laid on 
the ground, such as the terns, grouse, partridge, snipe, redshank, 
etc., but a theory, like a citadel, is only as strong as its weakest 
part, and as the majority show no signs of protective colouring, 
we must fain seek some other principle of colouration than the 
" survival of the fittest." Let us take a few glaring examples. 
All white eggs in open nests, as most of the pigeons, some of 
the owls and hawks, turtle dove, etc. All blue eggs in open 
nests, as heron, hedge sparrow, bullfinch, most of the thrushes, 
the blue variety of the guillemot, etc., and that large number 
(such as finches, etc.) which though somewhat resembling the 
lights and shades around them, are entirely given away by the 
background of their own nests. The cuckoo with her incon- 
siderate habits is a stranger anomaly still. In my small 


haphazard collection here there are, I think, seventeen clutches 
of different species, and about the same number of differently 
coloured cuckoos' eggs, and yet in a very few of these clutches 
does the cuckoo's egg in the very slightest way resemble the 
eggs of its foster mother. Now, according to evolution, long 
ago, the surviving cuckoos should be those who have escaped 
destruction by depositing an egg in a clutch resembling their 
own. So far, however, is this from the real case, that though 
nearly fifty per cent, of the cuckoos' eggs found in this country 
are in a hedge sparrow's nest, hardly ever is the well-known 
blue variety found in the blue clutch of the fosterer. 

We all know the redstart also lays a blue egg, almost 
exactly like the hedge sparrow, and curiously enough when a 
cuckoo's egg is found in the clutch it is nearly always a blue 
one. As however the redstart builds in a hole in a tree or post, 
the protective colouring seems quite unnecessary. There are, 
however, two exposed nests in which, if a cuckoo deposits an egg, 
it nearly always resembles the clutch, the brambling and the 
Orphean warbler. I have an example of the latter in my own 
collection, and the size only betrays the intruder, and there is 
one or more in the Natural History Collection at South 
Kensington. I believe abroad the cuckoo is as partial to this 
nest, as in England it is to the hedge sparrow's, so much so that 
frequently two cuckoo's eggs are deposited in the same nest. 
But now you will naturally say why raise all these difficulties 
about protective colouring ? Well, for years I could see no 
proofs of the great scheme of evolution except those two small 
component parts protective colouring and mimicry. I was 
therefore glad to try and adopt a theory of colouration that did 
not clash with a special creation. But it is far easier to destroy 
than to build up and I can only hope you will look leniently 
upon a principle that I only know as yet in its infancy. 

The theory I wish to call your attention to I may call 
colour-sensitiveness based somewhat on the popular chameleon 
principle. Professor Poulton, one of the greatest entomologists, 
gives in the Entomological Society's Transactions for 1903 some 
astounding results in his experiments upon the colour-relation 
between lepidopterous larvae and their surroundings. 

He sums up as follows : — 

" A very large number of records proved that the larvae 
rested by day upon the object they afterwards came to resemble." 


While I was studying these wonderful experiments the 
following correspondence appeared in " Knowledge " : — 

" Knowledge " September, 1903. 
Protective resemblance in Butterflies. 


Some years ago I made a collection of butterflies in the 
district of Santos, Brazil, and amongst them are two specimens 
obtained from the granite quarries, which in colour and mark- 
ings exactly reproduce the texture of granite. I have no doubt 
this is an instance of ordinary protective resemblance, for I 
remember how difficult it was to see these butterflies when once 
they had settled on the granite surface. The point, however, 
which strikes me as of considerable interest is that the general 
colouring of the butterflies is a cool blue grey exactly the shade 
of the freshly quarried stone on which it invariably settled. 
The weathered surfaces of the granite were greenish grey. The 
fact seems to point to the very rapid evolution of the butterfly's 
present colouring, since the quarries in question have probably 
only existed for some two or three hundred years and before 
that time the butterflies could not have found access to a freshly 
cleft granite surface. I am not entomologist enough to name 
the butterfly but would send a photograph to anyone interested. 
I should be glad if any of your correspondents who have studied 
the question of protective colouring could say whether there is 
any warrant for concluding that a change in colour of the kind 
indicated could be evolved within so limited a period. 

(Signed) W. S. Rogers. 

[This observation is of much interest, and there can be 
little doubt that the colour of the species has changed during 
the period mentioned under the influence of natural selection. 
During the last half of the nineteenth century British entomo- 
logists have noticed a distinct tendency on the part of certain 
moths, normally of a pale grey colour, to be replaced by dark 
varieties, in the manufacturing districts of the north of England, 
where the habitual resting-places of the insects — palings, tree- 
trunks, etc. — tend, through the deposition of soot, to be darker 
than usual. It must be remembered that a century or two is a 
comparatively long period in the life of a species of insect. 

(Signed) G. H. Carpenter.] 


"Knowledge" December, 1903. 
Protective resemblance in Butterflies. 


Mr. Rogers' letter in the September number of " Knowledge" 
on protective resemblance in butterflies opens up a fairly large 
question. In a note by Mr. Carpenter I see this resemblance 
is attributed to natural selection, both with regard to the 
Brazilian butterflies and the moths which assume a smoke- 
colour in our own country. 

With regard to the former it would be most interesting to 
know how long a time was occupied in their becoming like the 
granite ; but with regard to the effects of the smoke of London 
and other towns, such moths as betid aria and abrupt aria have 
certainly got darker in our own time, which hardly coincides 
w r ith the working of evolution, which is considered so slow as to 
be almost inperceptible. 

In the Entomological Society's Transactions for 1903 there 
is an article on the experiments carried out by Prof. E. B. 
Poulton on the colour-relation between lepidopterous larvae and 
their surroundings. These exhaustive experiments fully prove 
that the larvae of O. Bidcntata and G. Qiiercifolia are so extremely 
sensitive to the colour of their close surroundings that if they be 
moved from a dark stem to a piece of lichen, for instance, and 
nothing else be given them to rest on (neither of them rest on 
their food-plant) they will, like the chameleon, shortly change 
their pattern from dark to speckled, and assume again a 
protective colouring. 

May not this colour-sensitiveness in certain individuals be 
responsible for much that is put down to natural selection, and 
account for the many glaring failures that occur in the principle 
of protective colouration ? 

(Signed) Jos. F. Green. 

Royal Societies' Club, 

12th November, 1903. 


It seems to me that in this case of the Brazilian butterflies, 
a long graduated series from dark to light should be forthcoming 
if evolution was the origin of the change of colour, but it is the 
weak spot in the evolutionist's theory that no intermediate 
forms are ever visible. If this could be shown, natural selec- 
tion is proved. In the case of the smoke-coloured moths the 
graduated series can be shown, but as their resting place is also 
a graduated series, say, from the coal black of London, to the 
hardly tinted grey smoke colour of Box Hill, colour sensitive- 
ness may be responsible. As for the exceptionally short time 
required for lepidoptera, it has, I think, escaped Mr. Carpenter's 
notice that the imago is only on the tapis for a few days every 
year, and a still shorter time on the granite, and even supposing 
the change of colour had only just taken place, for which we have 
no evidence, the two hundred years would work out at a very 
short time ! Think also, how a gale, or unpropitious weather 
generally, would still further reduce the chances of so delicate 
an organism as a butterfly, from visiting the granite. 

Now compare this with the following. The oldest known 
picture in the world (Circa, 3,000 B.C.) is a fresco taken from a 
tomb at Maydoom. In it are four figures, exact representations 
of our present A . A Ibifrons and A . Ruficollis, showing that these 
two species have not altered in their wild state one iota in 5,000 
years. This is all the more miraculous when we consider how 
conspicuous A. Ruficollis is, both on land and water, and also 
that plenty of fixed domesticated varieties of both species can 
be obtained by mankind for their own particular purposes 
(notably for shows) in quite a short space of time. Yet an 
evolutionist would say 5,000 years is too short a time to show 
anything in the way of a change in a goose, though seemingly 
a few months is long enough for a Brazilian butterfly. Truly 
an elastic theory ! 

Let us apply this theory to eggs, where protective colouring 
is so mysteriously uncertain as to have been commented upon 
by the late Mr. Seebohm, as follows : — 

the peculiarities of form and colour which we 
find in birds and other animals do not seem to be all accounted 
for by the theory of the 'survival of the fittest.' There seems to 
be a correlation of the external colour of many birds with their 
internal organisation, which is inexplicable on the commonly 
received view." 


When egging at St. Albans Head I have been struck with 
the fact that the well-known blue variety of the guillemot seems 
always to be laid on a more exposed ledge of rock than the 
others, with more or less sky above, and sea all around, so in 
colour like its surroundings, but by no means a protective one, 
though some guillemots' eggs exactly resemble the greyish and 
yellowish cliffs they are on. Following the same line of argu- 
ment the blue colourings on eggs would be derived from the 
sea or sky. Quite blue, like all the family of long-necked 
herons', with an uninterrupted view of the heavens. Spotted 
(like, say a blackbird's), when the sky is seen through foliage. 
It is true some few birds in covered nests lay blue eggs, 
but for a long time I have said starlings may, perhaps, 
lay their eggs on the ground and deposit them afterwards 
in a hole, and for the reason that every year I pick up so 
many starlings' eggs on the ground, and always right in 
the open ; and also because at Owsden Hall, on 29th April, 
1894, I saw one fly to a hole, high up in an elm tree, 
with an egg in its mouth. It flew out again and dropped the 
egg, which I picked up and have now in my collection. It was 
a perfectly fresh and uninjured starling's egg. A redstart, so 
fond of a gate-post, may get an uninterrupted view straight up, 
and in the same way a jackdaw may get an interrupted view with 
patches of black. Cuckoos' eggs, with their extraordinary 
diversity of colour, would be accounted for by the great 
diversity in the colour of ground upon which the eggs are 
laid, and the blue variety, either from the rare blue male bird, or 
perhaps from the sky. The gay plumage of female birds would 
be obtained from the males, whether in a covered nest or not, 
that is to say, their bright colouring would overcome the colour 
of surroundings. This would also apply to all birds nesting in 
colonies, such as rooks, herons, gulls, guillemots, swifts, swallows, 
martins, etc., where the two sexes are always alike in colouring, 
because here the number, all with the same colouring, would 
make up for a dull plumage and so again overcome the colour 
of the surroundings, and, as I mentioned before, would account 
for the sexes being alike in colour in all animal life that con- 
gregated together. 

In polygamy the same hen would so seldom see the cock, 
that bright colouring would not come in, and she would more 
likely resemble her surroundings, as females of pheasants, 
peacocks, etc. In the ducks the case is reversed, as the males 


after being with the females for months, adopt the female 
plumage, but with all British swans and geese the sexual 
colouring is the same. The chaffinch, another exception, is so 
little with his spouse as to earn its scientific name of ccelebs, (a 
bachelor), which will, I think, account for a slight difference in 
several of the finches, while the young of all species would 
more or less resemble the ever-present mother. 

The orioles at first glance would seem to upset the theory, 
as the male is exceptionally brilliant, but then his plumage 
resembles the sober dress of his wife until his third year, and so 
her costume may by that time have become a fixture. 

In entomology the brilliant colouring of the male would 
also seem to be transferred to the female, as red admirals, 
peacocks, coppers, swallow tails, etc. The blues (that puzzling 
colour) are an exception, but all the blues have brilliantly- 
coloured undersides, and alike in both sexes, which they love to 
show when at rest, so the likeness might be transferred from 
there. So with the purple emperor and many others. The 
brilliant pattern of the poisonous larvae would be derived from 
the food-plant whether the protective colouring be needed or not, 
and thus explain many apparent anomalies in insect life. 

If protective colouring was derived by evolution we ought, 
in every species, to get a series with a perfect gradation of 
colour, showing how the more perfect had supplanted the im- 
perfect, but such is not the case. As Sir Herbert Maxwell so 
w r ell puts it, there is no apprentice hand in nature. Apiarian 
science tells us that on the sarcophagi, on Egyptian stones, and 
and on papyri, there are drawings of the combs of bees identical 
in every particular with the present. So with that marvel of 
architecture the spider's web. Traced back, as it can be, for 
thousands of years, no semblance of any alteration is visible, 
and so it would seem to be with every living organism, for surely 
the fossils and extinct forms we come so continually across are 
but the remains of an earlier and altogether distinct form of life, 
that ceased or was destroyed we know not how, except that "the 
earth was (or had become) without form and void " after which 
Adam and Eve are expressly told to replenish the earth. All 
was orignally created perfect for its work, and thus colour-sensi- 
tiveness would be more or less inherent in every creature, and 
although often fulfilling the duty of protective colouration, is 


absolutely distinct from the gradually evolved and uncom- 
promising doctrine of the " survival of the fittest." But, you may 
say, does not this colour-sensitiveness fail in as many cases as 
evolution ? My answer would be that although colour-sensitive- 
ness, or harmony in colours, may well be an integral part of a 
perfect creation, no protection would be needed as long as all 
animal life lived harmoniously. Was it not Plato who compared 
man to a chariot and pair striving to ascend to the gods, but in 
vain, because although one horse had perfect wings, those of its 
companion had become atrophied. These horses were named 
" Spirit " and " Flesh." And so to-day, spirit is perfect, but, 
after Adam's fall, flesh became atrophied, which may, perhaps, 
account for the many inconsistencies in nature. 





Read at the Meeting of the Society on 24th 
February, 1904. 

T T is unnecessary here and now to make any excursion into. 

the abstract mazes of a theory of the Beautiful or the 
*y origin of the Sense of Beauty, or, indeed, to define exactly 
the idea intended to be brought forward by the term 
Beauty of Form in Animals. The standards of beauty in 
different nations and in the same nations at successive stages of 
mental development, are too diverse and too shifting to allow 
of precise definition. But for our practical purpose here, we 
may take it as acknowledged that such an animal as a Gazelle 
is beautiful in form, and that a Hippopotamus is the reverse. 
" Solvitur ambulando" — that useful, if somewhat vague, saying — 
may then be our motto in this matter. 

Beauty of Form must include two main elements — Firstly : 
a measure of slenderness of build ; secondly : symmetry in whole 
and in part, so that the head, trunk and limbs of the animal are 
fairly proportioned to one another. A good example of this 
symmetry in whole and in part, is familiar to us all in the 
case of a well-bred domestic horse ; and an example of another 
familiar animal which fails to reach fully this symmetry, is the 
domestic ass, with its disproportionately long head and naso- 
frontal region, and its remarkably long ears. In this case it 
would not be correct to call the domestic ass ugly, but simply 
to point out that in certain respects it is lacking in symmetry. 

The relation of what we call Beauty of Form to Muscular 
Activity, is, of course, not universal, and this relation can only 


be profitably studied among the higher animal forms. The 
series of Vertebrates will alone be considered, so that our 
illustrated examples will be taken from fishes upwards to man. 
It may be added that Muscular Activity is here distinguished 
from pure strength and size of muscle. 


The general form of fishes is graceful, though there are 
notable exceptions, which will be referred to. The pointed 
snout, tapering backwards to the head, from which the body 
again tapers gracefully to the tail, affords a generally elegant 
outline, and a form well calculated to present the minimum of 
resistance to the water. 

The Teleostean, or bony-skeletoned fishes, present the 
greatest number of graceful forms, and among these there are 
many which at once occur to our minds, such as the Perch 
family, Bass, Bream, Carp, Roach, Tench, Herrings, Mackerel, 
Grayling, Gudgeon, Salmon, Trout, Minnow, Sword Fishes, 
Sticklebacks. These are all elegant in general form, with 
symmetry of head, body and fins, and are homocercal, i.e., 
possess symmetrical tails, and are well-known for the activity of 
their movements. Of all these, perhaps the most active and 
vivacious and graceful, are the Sticklebacks. 

The groups of Fishes which are either far less graceful or 
decidedly clumsy, in their form, are the Pleuronectidse or Flat 
Fishes, such as Turbot, Sole, Flounders, Plaice, with their 
flattened bodies, unsymmetrical head, and eyes both on one side 
of the head. These fishes, as a rule, inhabit the sandy bottoms 
of the seas, and depend more on their protective colouration for 
safety than for any activity of habit. Here is seen the reverse 
of the former group, for we have sluggishness of life and habit, 
associated with comparative ugliness and asymmetry. Other 
Flat Fishes are the Rays and Skates, and these also are com- 
paratively sluggish in habit, and anything but elegant in form. 
They also depend for safety largely upon colouration, though 
certain fish, such as the Torpedo or Electric Ray, have a formid- 
able weapon in the electric apparatus with which it is able to 
stun or kill an adversary. The Ganoid or Armoured Fishes, 
which are of ancient origin among their class, are less elegant 
in form than most of those in our first group, and possess an 
asymmetrical tail, and are known as heterocercal ; as a group, 


these are powerful but inactive creatures, voracious in feeding 
on smaller fishes, and partially hybernating for a few months in 
the year; altogether of high ancestry and low habits. The 
Sturgeons are the chief representatives of this group. 

The elasmobranch fishes, such as Sharks, are also 
heterocercal, and have ugly heads, but their bodies are lithe 
and elegant, and their habits very active, though the Great 
Basking Shark is an exception to this, being both ugly in form 
and inactive in habits. 

Numerous individual fishes might be mentioned as showing 
greater or less ugliness of form and inertness of habit ; among 
these, are the following : — 

The British Angler Fish, or Sea Devil, Frog-fish, Fishing 
Frog (lophius piscatorius) , is about as ugly a fish as can be 
found. It spends its sluggish life at or near the bottom of the 
sea, and at the mercy of wind or current. It is a short squat 
creature, with a broad head and an enormously wide mouth, 
which it opens wide to catch such small fry as it can attract by 
its cunning fishing-tackle ; this consists of a waving crest 
tentacle situated centrally on the forepart of the great head, 
and the animal lies half-hidden by the seaweed, and well pro- 
tected by its dull colouring, until the unwary prey are 
engulphed in its great maw, to which the moving filament 
serves to attract them. Grotesque, ugly and heavy in form, it 
is sluggish to a degree in its habits, and dependent on a low 
form of cunning for its livelihood. It probably illustrates the 
combination of sluggishness of habit and ugliness of form as 
closely as the gazelle shows activity and grace of form. 

The Angel Fish, a form intermediate between Sharks and 
Rays, is another ill-favoured flattened fish of sluggish habits. 
So also the John Dory is considered an exceedingly ugly and 
ill-favoured fish, and is of sluggish habit and incapable of 
much activity, frequently drifting about at the mercy of any 
current of water. 

The Globe Fishes and Coffer Fishes are groups specially 
modified, possessing bodies somewhat flattened when in their 
ordinary condition, but capable of extraordinary distension of 
of the oesophagus with air, which constitutes for them a method 
of protection. They become distended at will and float on the 


surface, and some which possess spines are very efficiently pro- 
tected, even in their helpless drifting state. 

All these are emphatically ugly in form and inactive in 
mode of life. Bullheads and Gurnards, with broad heavy heads, 
are among the less prepossessing fishes, and are less active in 
habit than many others. 

The Stargazer is an ugh' fish with clumsy head, and in- 
habits the bottom of the sea, being concealed among stones, 
also employing somewhat the same kind of fishing tackle as the 
Angler Fish, to attract various small forms of prey. 

The Lumpsuckers (Cycloptcridce) are coarse, heavily-built 
fishes, with skin so thick on the dorsal region as to obscure the 
dorsal fin, and with an adhesive disc on the ventral surface, by 
means of which they become attached to rocks, and devote 
themselves largely to the pleasures of the table. They prefer 
the fry of other species of fish, and are a low-living class of 

It is rather noticeable how many of the sluggish and ill- 
favoured fish to which we have referred, are very much devoted 
to preying, which is, perhaps, what one would expect, judging 
from analogy in higher animals. I think it is fair to say that 
Sluggishness, Ugliness of Form and Gorging, are intimately 
associated in the majority of lower animals. 


Amphibians are divided into the two main groups of Tailless 
and Tailed Amphibians, the former including Frogs and Toads, 
the latter Newts, Salamanders and Cecilians. All the frogs and 
and toads are more or less grotesque in form, especially the 
toads, and the connection between activity and gracefulness 
and the reverse, comes out very well in this group ; the most 
graceful of the frogs being the agile frogs, tree frogs and grass- 
hopper frogs, the limbs and body of which are tolerably sym- 
metrical, and the toads and certain more sluggish frogs are far 
more unsightly and more inactive than those mentioned. For 
pure ugliness the toad has become proverbial. It may also be 
mentioned here that many of the Tailless Amphibians go 
through a form of hybernation, which means a more or less 
sluggish life. The Tailed Amphibians are more elegantly 
formed, and show more symmetry than frogs and toads, and 
greater activity of habits. 



Reptiles, as a class, exhibit little beauty of form. We have 
but to refer to the clumsy long body, very short limbs, and evil- 
looking head of Crocodiles and Alligators, to show that sluggish 
and voracious habits are associated with want of beauty in 
form. But in Snakes and Lizards, where activity, especially 
among the former, is a marked characteristic, the general form 
is graceful. Tortoises and Turtles, though possessed of beauti- 
fully-marked carapaces, are eminently clumsy and wanting in 
symmetry, and of inactive, indolent habits, relying upon passive 
rather than active methods of protection from their foes. 


The class of Birds, as in the case of Fishes; is essentially 
one in which beauty of form and extreme activity of habits are 
the rule. There are but few exceptions to this rule, such as 
Penguins, which are heavily built, clumsy and most sluggish 
birds. The Flightless Birds, such as Ostriches and Emus, 
which, though capable of extremely rapid locomotion, are less 
active than other birds, and wanting considerably in symmetry 
of head, trunk and limbs. Another flightless bird, now extinct, 
the Dodo, was heavy and clumsy in its build, and its head 
and beak are disproportioned to the body. 

Owls again, though capable of activity, are nocturnal, and 
less accustomed to a life of great activity than other birds, and 
are comparatively wanting in symmetry. 

The Cranes, Storks, especially the Adjutants, Hornbills, 
Pelicans, Gannets, Cormorants, Flamingoes, are all birds with 
highly specialized activity in regard to the movements of their 
necks and beaks, but not of generally active habits of life, and 
all decidedly show want of proportion between body, head, neck 
and limbs. Of all birds, perhaps the stupid, heavy and ugly 
and sluggish Penguins are at once the least beautiful and most 
inert in life. 


Of the great Mammalian Class, numerous illustrations 
may be taken to show the truth of our thesis ; the only 
difficulty is to select the most striking examples. It will 
be best to pass rapidly in view the eleven great orders of 
Mammals, referring to the more notable forms in which beauty 
or the reverse is manifested. 


Monotr ernes are but a low group of creatures, characterised 
by timid, quiet habits and indifferent bodily form. 

Marsupials, including Kangaroos, Wallabys, Phalangers, 
Wombats, present great variety, but most of the two former 
groups, though very active in habits, show too much specializa- 
tion of their muscular activities to be well-proportioned ; the 
Wombats, heavy burrowing animals ; Phalangers, more graceful 
and of great activity. 

Edentates are an order in which almost, with exception^ 
ugliness or grotesqueness of form is associated with sluggishness 
of life and habit. They inhabit warm climates, and are well 
protected by colouring, armour, or by a kind of low cunning, 
which impels them to retreat from the haunts of other animals 
by day and to seek their food at night. In illustration the 
Sloths, Ant- Eaters, Armadillos, Pangolins may be mentioned, 
and the special Earth Pig or Aard Verk. 

Rodents resemble Birds in the fact that the great majority 
of them are of elegant form and active habits. A few exceptions 
may be found in the case of the Porcupine, which has its 
specialized method of defence and offence, but is an awkwardly- 
shaped and generally sluggish animal. Such forms as Squirrels,. 
Marmots, Beavers, Rats, Mice, Caveys, are instances of active, 
diligent workers for their livelihood, with well-proportioned 
shape of head, body, limbs and tails. 

Cetacea comprises Whales, Dolphins, Porpoises, and among 
these there is hardly one which can claim any beauty of form, 
for the great wide aperture of the mouth and insignificant head 
and horizontally-placed tail are not made up for by the tapering, 
lithe, active body. In this class of Mammals the habits are 
more active than the unprepossessing bodies would suggest. 

Sirenia. Another order of Aquatic Mammals includes 
Manatis and Dugongs, are much less active in their mode of 
life than Cetaceans, and do not inhabit the open seas as do the 
latter, but frequent shallow bays, estuaries, lagoons and large 
rivers, seeking their food at the bottoms of these, and feeding 
largely on aquatic plants. They are said to be stupid and 
inoffensive, and to be endowed with little intelligence, and, 
without doubt, are very clumsy and ill-favoured creatures. So 
they afford signal examples of our position that sluggishness 
and ugliness are generally associated. 


Ungulates. This great and diversified order of Hoofed 
Mammals presents very numerous instances which bear out our 
present contention. It will serve the purpose best to enumerate, 
first, the more graceful forms of Ungulates, and then the ugly 
or unsymmetrical or less graceful forms, mentioning any points 
as to their habits which concern the matter in question. 

The varied members of Genus Bos. Domestic and Wild 
Cattle, except in a few species, are well-proportioned and 
graceful in form ; the Sheep (except in regard to the great horns 
of some wild species), and Goats, especially Ibex and Chamois, 
are well-proportioned and well-formed ; the larger Antelopes, such 
as Eland, Kudu, Oryx or Sable and Roan Antelope, Gazelles 
of all species, Black Buck, Water Buck, Steinbok, Duikerbok, 
Hartebeests, Prongbuck, all the large family of Cervidae (except 
the Elk, which has horns and nasal prominences developed out 
of proportion to the rest of the body, and very long legs), 
Chevrotains, Vicunas, Llama ; among the Equidae, Zebras, 
Wild Asses, especially Kiang and Onager, Equus Caballus or 
the Domestic Horse in all its varieties (though among these 
there are marked degrees of beauty of form). All these are 
characterized by beauty of form and well-proportioned body 
and limbs. In certain of them the size of head and length of 
horns are somewhat out of proportion as regards appearance. 

Among this great group certain forms may be singled out 
for general ugliness of shape or marked disproportion of head, 
trunk or limbs, e.g., American Bison, Yak, Musk Ox, Saiga 
Antelope, Wildebeest, Giraffes, Camels, Pigs (except perhaps the 
Peccaries and the Red Bush Pig), Hippopotamus, Rhinoceros, 
Elephants, Tapirs. 

As to the habits of the first group, they are, without excep- 
tion, active ; but of the second group, certain individuals may 
be alluded to more particularly. The Bison is active and 
powerful to a great degree when these qualities are called upon, 
but it can hardly be reckoned among the more actively-disposed 
Ungulates. The Saiga Antelope, a small clumsy animal not 
unlike a large wild sheep in size, is sluggish in mode of life, 
though able, for a short distance, to cover the ground quickly, 
but is said to be soon blown with exertion. Wildebeests are as 
active as most Antelopes, but must be reckoned among the ill- 
proportioned group on account of their great development of 
head, neck and horns ; the general form of their bodies is elegant 


and well-proportioned. Giraffes are decidedly ill-proportioned, 
and not adapted to a constantly active life, though capable of 
running at a most rapid pace and for a considerable distance. 
Lyddekker quotes Gordon Cumming as speaking of the Giraffe 
as one of the most dignified and beautiful of animals. It is 
difficult to agree with this when regard is had to the small 
head, immensely long neck, preponderance in length of fore- 
limbs over hind-limbs, though in certain attitudes and half- 
hidden by low trees and brushwood, the Giraffe must present a 
fine spectacle from some little distance. 

Camels, though able for immensely long journeys, and 
capable of bearing great fatigue, cannot be said to have active 
habits, and are said to be animals as vicious and intractable as 
any that man has learnt to domesticate. The habits of the 
Hippopotami and Rhinoceroses are sluggish and indolent in the 
extreme, very much in keeping with their ungainly, heavy, 
clumsy build of head, trunk and limbs. Tapirs are also shy, 
inoffensive, sluggishly-disposed animals, which inhabit brush- 
wood and swamps, and hide themselves in these for their 
protection, being mainly nocturnal in habit. Of the Elephant 
nothing need be said, for, whatever its great intelligence and 
docility may do in raising it above its fellows in the eyes of 
man, neither is its form elegant nor are its general habits active, 
except on occasions. 

The Carnivores present a highly-developed order of 
Mammals, the most important group of which are the Terres- 
trial Carnivores. The Aquatic forms, such as Seals and 
Walruses, are, without exception, ill-proportioned and some- 
what clumsy in build, showing broad small heads, thick necks, 
strangely-modified limbs and smooth shapeless bodies. Never- 
theless, as a group, they are active in habits and much addicted 
to combats of a fierce kind, especially the males, and are said to 
be of a high degree of intelligence. In this instance our general 
rule breaks down somewhat, though it may be remarked that 
the Seals and Walruses, in spite of general activity, do not dis- 
play any large range as to the kind of activity. They are 
instances of animals very highly specialized for a monotonous 

The Terrestrial Carnivores are much more varied and 
numerous. They are broadly divisible into the great groups of 
Cats, Dogs and Bears, or CEluroidea, Cynoidea and Arctoidea. 
With the Bears may be reckoned the Weasels and Raccoons. 


The great Cat Tribe has two main divisions, viz., the 
Felidae, and the smaller Cats, such as Civets, Mongooses, 
Genets, and the Hyaenas. All the former, being essentially 
beasts of prey, combine a high degree of activity and ferocity, 
and depend very largely upon superior intelligence, cunning, 
strength and agility for their livelihood, and for their high rank 
among wild animals. To this rule there is hardly an exception, 
and when one enumerates some of the leading members of the 
family, it is evident at once that symmetry, strength and beauty 
of form are combined in the great Cats to an unusua] degree. 
We have but to remember the Lion, Tiger, Leopard, Puma, 
Jaguar, Cheetah, Ocelot, Lynx, to see that our rule holds good 
very closely in this group. Among them are few, if any, of the 
grotesque, clumsy, powerful forms which are seen so often in the 
other families of the animal kingdom. It would be impossible 
to enter here into any details of their structure and form, so 
well adapted to a very active life. 

The smaller Cats, such as Civets, Mongooses and Genets, 
are also highly active, and generally of an elegant, elongated 
form, but less symmetrical than the Felidae, because of their 
relatively short limbs. 

Hycerias are also well-proportioned, except as regard the 
size and " pose " of the head, and are less well-favoured than 
the Felidae, but are of savage, cowardly disposition, though 
active in habits. It is very likely we should think them better 
looking in shape if we did not feel the natural aversion from 
them caused by our knowledge of their habits and dispositions. 

The Cynoidea or Dogs are a far more generally fine-shaped 
and elegant group than the Bears. When we think of all the 
varieties of Wolves, Foxes, and even Jackals, we see at once the 
close connection between a fierce, very active disposition and 
habit of life, and beauty of form. The Dog Tribe show sym- 
metrical heads, trunks and limbs, and give altogether the 
impression of lithe and graceful creatures. Among the endless 
varieties of Canis Familiaris, or the Domestic Dog, our principle 
is well illustrated. For if one thinks of the Staghound, Grey- 
hound, Mastiff, Newfoundland, Beagle, Wolfhound, Boar- 
hound, Collie, Pointer, Setter, Smooth and Rough Terriers, and 
certain Wild Dogs, such as those of the Eskimo, we see a very 
marked and varying beauty of form and high degree of activity, 
whereas in the case of the Bull Dog, Dachshund, Poodle and 


Pug, we see grotesqueness and exaggeration of certain features 
and markedly sluggish habits. 

The Bears, Weasels and Raccoons are a very diverse group. 
The latter may be reckoned among the graceful and active 
forms. But the Bears are, without exception, clumsy and ill- 
proportioned, with their short and yet pointed muzzles, very 
small ears, heavy great body, absence of tails, and clumsy 
plantigrade feet. There are, no doubt, certain of the group that 
are less ill-favoured, such as the Himalayan Black Bear, but 
the Sloth Bear is a hideous ill-shaped creature of timid and 
sluggish life. The whole family of Bears are animals in which 
sluggishness of habit prevails considerably, though they are all 
powerful and fierce when attacked, the Grizzly Bear being one 
of the fiercest of wild animals. The gait of all of them is un- 
gainly, even at their full speed. 

Insectivores approach more to Rodents in general form 
than to other groups, and are, like them, generally elongated in 
body and head, with short limbs, and somewhat primitive in 
general form. They are mostly of very active habits, except in 
so far as they are hybernating animals. The Hedgehogs are 
ill-shaped and clumsy, and less active than most other Insecti- 
vorous forms. 

Bats are strange and grotesque animals, forms highly 
specialized for a special form of aerial life. The less ugly of 
them are extremely ill-proportioned, and the more ugly form, 
such as the Malayan Naked Bat, the Leaf-Nosed Bat, the 
Flower-Nosed Bat, the False Vampire Bat, are strange, 
grotesque animals, without any approach to beauty of form. 
All are active in their nocturnal aerial life, but spend a very 
large part of their time suspended on the boughs of trees by a 
specially-adapted modification of the digits of the fore-limb into 
a hook. 

The Primates include Lemuridce, Hapalidce or Marmosets, 
Monkeys, Anthropoid Apes and Man. 

Lemuridce are quiet and nocturnal in habits, and mostly of 
an elongated form, with pointed snout and very long bushy tails, 
and hardly to be called beautiful or the reverse, though among 
them are several very ugly forms, such as Tarsier, Aye-Aye and 
Loris. Marmosets are also somewhat disproportioned creatures 


with large heads and very long tails, and resemble squirrels 
more than monkeys. 

Among Monkeys the principle here laid down is shown in 
spite of the fact that most Monkeys are somewhat grotesque 
in form. But there are some, such as the Spider- Monkeys and 
Macaci, in which a marked elegance of trunk and limbs goes 
with great agility ; and others, such as the Baboons, show a 
corresponding awkwardness of shape and movement, and much 
less active habits. Indeed, some of these, e.g., the Drill, 
Mandrill and Arabian Baboons, are ugly in the extreme, though 
this does not accompany a specially sluggish disposition, on the 
contrary, they are fierce and active at times, though like all 
their tribes, much addicted to sitting for a long time at rest. 

It is noteworthy how few of the great group of Primates, 
except Man, and he only in his higher development, show real 
beauty of form and symmetry. But Man's supposed congeners, 
the Anthropoid Apes, furnish examples of our principle, three 
of the four genera being distinctly ill-proportioned and ugly, 
viz., Gorilla, Orang and Chimpanzee, and one much more 
elegant and well-proportioned, viz., the Gibbon. In these 
cases the difference in form is associated with marked differences 
of habit, the latter being extremely agile and active ; the three 
former sluggish in life, though powerful and fierce when attacked 
or provoked. 

In the case of Man, the relation between beauty of form and 
muscular activity only partially appears because the introduction 
of the element of sexual selection interferes with the pure action 
of an active habit on the general form and symmetry; but 
within limits, it is evident, even in Genus Homo, that muscular 
activity leads to or accompanies symmetry and elegance of form. 

From this somewhat discursive study of large series of 
animal forms, three conclusions emerge : — 

First. — In the extreme instances of beauty of form on the 
one hand and ugliness or grotesqueness of form on the other, no 
doubt can be entertained of the fact that with the former, 
muscular activity and generally active habits, and with the 
latter, sluggishness of habit, are intimately associated. There 
are numerous forms of animal life to which reference has been 
made which may be called indifferent as to beauty of form and 


activity of habit and muscular activity. The proposition here 
advanced is proved to be valid to a large extent by the con- 
sideration of extreme cases. 

Second. — Any special muscular activity highly developed, 
when general activity is wanting, does not lead to beauty of 

Third. — When an animal's methods of protection are of the 
passive order, e.g., colouration or heavy armour, beauty of form 
is rare, and where the protection is of the active kind, beauty of 
form is much more frequent. 

The question must also be asked, viz. : Does the beauty 
of form in these animals precede the muscular activity, or the 
muscular activity precede the beauty of form ? I think there 
can be but one answer to this, viz., that the beauty of form is 
preceded and produced by the activity of life of the animals 
presenting it. The survival-value of the activity of habit of 
these creatures has been the first factor in their specialized 
development, and the beauty of form has followed from this. 
Moral for ourselves : May we not, by analogy, expect that 
physical activity and energy of life in the human animal will 
bring with it beauty of form ? Indeed, I think it is seen that the 
modern cult of physical development does produce a finer- 
looking race of young men and women than the comparative 
neglect of physical culture did a generation or two ago. 



1. — The Society shall be called the West Kent Natural History, 
Microscopical and Photographic Society, and have for its 
objects the promotion of the study of Natural History, Microscopical 
Research, and Photography. 

2. — The Society shall consist of members who shall pay an annual 
subscription of 10s. 6d., and of honorary members. The annual 
subscription may, however, be commuted into a Life Subscription by 
the payment of £5 5s. in one sum. All subscriptions shall be due on 
1st January in each year. 

3. — The affairs of the Society shall be managed by a Council, con- 
sisting of a President, four Vice-Presidents, Treasurer, two Secretaries, 
and 13 Members, who shall be elected from the general body of 
ordinary members. 

4. — The President and other officers and members of Council shall be 
annually elected by ballot. The Council shall prepare a list of such 
persons as they think fit to be so elected, which shall be laid before the 
general meeting, and any member shall be at liberty to strike out all or 
any of the names proposed by the Council, and substitute any other 
name or names he may think proper. The President and Vice- 
Presidents shall not hold office longer than two consecutive years. 

5. — The Council shall hold their meetings on the day of the ordinary 
meetings of the Society, before the commencement of such meeting. No 
business shall be done unless five members be present. 

6. — Special meetings of Council shall be held at the discretion of the 
President, or one of the Vice-Presidents. 

7. — The Council shall prepare, and cause to be read at the annual 
meeting, a report on the affairs of the Society for the preceding year. 

8. — Two Auditors shall be elected by show of hands at the ordinary 
meeting held in January. They shall audit the Treasurer's accounts, 
and produce their report at the annual meeting. 


9. — Every candidate for admission into the Society must be proposed 
and seconded at one meeting and balloted for at the next ; and when 
two-thirds of the votes of the members present are in favour of the 
candidate he shall be duly elected. No new member shall be entitled 
to any of the privileges and advantages of the Society until he shall 
have paid his subscription for the first year of his membership. 

10. — Each member shall have the right to be present and vote at all 
general meetings, and to propose candidates for admission as members. 
He shall also have the privilege of introducing two visitors to the 
ordinary and field meetings of the Society. 

11. — No member shall have the right of voting, or be entitled to any 
of the advantages of the Society, if his subscription be six months in 
arrear. And if any member's subscription shall be in arrear for three 
years, the Council shall have power in their discretion to remove his 
name from the List of Members, and he shall thereupon cease to be a 
member, and to have any claim or interest in the Society or its property, 
but this Rule is without prejudice to any claim which the Society may 
have against such member for arrears of subscriptions. 

12. — The annual meeting shall be held on the Fourth Wednesday in 
February, for the purpose of electing officers for the year ensuing, for 
receiving the reports of the Council and Auditors, and for transacting 
any other business. 

13. — Notice of the annual meeting shall be given at the preceding 
ordinary meeting. 

14. — The ordinary meetings shall be held on the fourth Wednesday in 
the months of October, November, January, March, April, and May, 
and the second Wednesday in December, or at such other date and at 
such place as the Council may determine. The Chair shall be taken at 
8 p.m., and the business of the meeting being disposed of, the meeting 
shall resolve into a conversazione. 

15. — Field meetings may be held during the summer months at the 
discretion of the Council ; of these, due notice in respect to time, place, 
&c, shall be sent to each member. 

16. — Special meetings shall be called by the Secretaries immediately 
upon receiving a requisition signed by not less than five members, such 


requisition to state the business to be transacted at the meeting. 
Fourteen days' notice of such meeting- shall be given in writing by the 
Secretaries to each member of the Society, such notice to contain a 
copy of the requisition, and no business but that of which notice is thus 
given shall be transacted at such special meeting. 

17. — Members shall have the right of suggesting to the Council any 
books to be purchased for the use of the Society. 

18. — All books in the possession of the Society shall be allowed to 
circulate among the members, under such regulations as the Council 
may deem necessary. 

19. — The microscopical objects and instruments in the possession of 
the Society shall be made available for the use of the members, under 
such regulations as the Council may determine ; and the books, objects, 
and instruments shall be in the custody of one of the Secretaries. 

20. — The Council shall have power to recommend to the members any 
gentleman not a member of the Society, who may have contributed 
scientific papers or otherwise benefited the Society, to be elected an 
honorary member ; such election to be by show of hands. 

21. — No alteration in the Rules shall be made, except at the annual 
meeting, or at a meeting specially convened for the purpose, and then 
by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present, of 
which latter meeting, fourteen days' notice shall be given, and in either 
case notice of the alterations proposed must be given at the previous 
meeting, and also inserted in the circulars sent to the members. 



£tef of (Jttemfiers* 

Members a?-e particularly requested to notify any change in their 
add?-ess to the Hon. Secretaries, 54, St. John's Park, 
Blackheath, S.E. 

NOTE. — Members against whose names an asterisk is placed were Members 
either of the West Kent Natural History and Microscopical Society 
or of the Blackheath Photographic Society, in 1863, at the time of 
the amalgamation of these Societies, the Society as at present 
constituted having been formed upon such amalgamation. A date 
against the name of a member shows the date of his election. 

Jgonorarp Qttemfiere. 

*Bossey, F., M.D., Oxford Terrace, Red Hill, Surrey. 

*Colling\vood, Dr. C, M.A., B.M. (Oxon), M.R.C.P., F.L.S., &c, 
69, Great Russell Street, W.C. 

1896 Dallinger, Rev. W. H., D.D., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., F.L.S., &c, 

" Ingleside," 38, Newstead Road, Lee, S.E. 

*Jones, Sydney, 18, Portland Place, W. 

fetfe (Memfiere. 

1865 Avebury, Lord, F.R.S., &c, "High Elms," Farnborough, R.S.O., 

* Dawson, W. G., Plumstead Common. 

1870 Dewick, Rev. E. S., M.A., F.S.A., F.G.S., 26, Oxford Square, 
Hyde Park, W. 

1886 Green, Joseph F., West Lodge, Eliot Vale, Blackheath. 

1878 Jones, Herbert, F.L.S., F.S.A., 42, Shooters Hill Road, Black- 
heath. {Hon. Treasurer). 

1876 Knill, Alderman Sir John, Bart., South Vale House, Blackheath. 


©rfctnarg (Ttlem6er0. 

1882 Adams, Harold J., M.A., F.R.A.S., "St. John's," Oakwood 

Avenue, Beckenham. {Vice-President.) 

1892 Adkin, R., "Wellfield," Lingards Road, Lewisham. 

1883 Ballance, A. W., Park Lodge, Blackheath Park, S.E. 

1897 Bennett, C. J., "The Haven," 98, Palace Road, Tulse Hill, S.W. 

1897 Bennett, E. F. T., Rugby Cottage, 4, Upper Park Place, 
Blackheath Park. 

1867 Billinghurst, H. F., F.S.S., 7, Oakcroft Road, Blackheath. 


1900 Billinghurst, W. B, B.A., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., 7, Oakcroft 

Road, Blackheath. {Council.) 

1897 Blakesley, Thomas H., M.A., C.E., "The Elms," Eliot Park, 
Blackheath. {Council.) 

1903 Bucke, H. M., London and Provincial Bank, Westcombe Park, 

1902 Burman, W. H., "St. Margaret's," Eltham. 
1897 Butcher, W. F., F.C.S., 4, Eliot Vale, Blackheath. 

1901 Cooney, Arthur Edward, 45, London Street, Greenwich. 
1890 Cox, F. J., " Lustleigh," Dorville Road, Lee. 

1875 Deed, Alfred, F.R.G.S., F.R. Met. Socy., " Heathfield," Priory 

Lane, Blackheath. (Council.) 

1866 Dewick, J., 59, Clarendon Road, Lewisham. 

1892 Draper, Geo., F.R.G.S., 82, Shooters Hill Road, Blackheath. 
( Vice-President.) 

1902 Draper, Lewis, B„ 82, Shooters Hill Road, Blackheath. 

1884 Edwards, Stanley, F.R.G.S., F.L.S., F.Z.S., 15, St. Germans 

Place, Blackheath. (Council.) 

1903 Feak, W. M, R.N., Mill House, Blackheath. 

1903 Foucar, James Louis, " Beaulieu," St. John's Park, Blackheath. 
1901 Fountain, Frederic, 44, Crooms Hill, Greenwich. 

1903 Frean, W. P., 3, Stone Buildings, Lincoln's Inn, W.C. 

1897 Gover, A. S., 10, Lee Park, Blackheath. 

1897 Gover, W. H., 12, Lee Park, Blackheath. (Council.) 

*Groves, William, Grove House, Shortlands, Kent. 
1903 Hart, Professor H., " Avalon," Lee Park, Blackheath. 

1876 Hainworth, H., F.R.H.S, " Kirton," 54, St. John's Park, 

Blackheath. (Hon. Secretary.) 

1903 Henderson, J. S., Eton House, Dacre Park, Lee. 

1904 Henderson, James, 82, Shooters Hill Road, Blackheath. 
1897 Hilton, John, 30, Budge Row, London, E.C. 

1903 Hopper, H. R., 114, High Road, Lee. 

1896 Kidd, Walter, M.D., F.Z.S., 12, Montpelier Row, Blackheath. 



1886 Kiddle, R. N, L.D.S., Eng., 46, Lee Terrace, Blackheath. 

{Con ncil.) 

1871 Low, Edwin, 3, Eliot Park, Blackheath. 

1901 Low, Victor Howard, 34, Granville Park, Blackheath. {Council.) 

1903 Low, Frank Harrison, M.B., M.R.C.S., " Heathbank," Black- 

heath Rise, S.E. 

1902 Maltass, A. E., 82, Shooters Hill Road, Blackheath. 

1904 Matthews, Marmaduke Capper, Linley House, Blackheath Park. 
1899 May, Morgan, 60, Shooters Hill Road, Blackheath. {Council.) 

1896 McDougall, Jas. T., " Dunolly," Morden Road, Blackheath. 

1873 McLachlan, Robert, F.R.S., F.L.S., kc, "West View," 23, 
Clarendon Road, Lewisham. {Vice-President.) 

* Purvis, Prior, M.D., 5, Lansdowne Place, Blackheath. 

1897 Ryley, Thomas, 7, Park Place, Blackheath Park. 

1887 Saunders, H. S., 71, Lee Road, Blackheath. {Council.) 
1893 Saunders, M. L., 13, Blessington Road, Lee. 

1872 Smith, W. Johnson, F.R.C.S., Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. 

1899 Soames, Rev. Werner H. K., M.A., " Fernleigh," Westcombe 
Park Road, Blackheath. 

1901 Stone, Arthur, B.A., 3, Lansdowne Place, Blackheath. 

1899 Stone, Charles, 6, Vanbrugh Terrace, Blackheath. 

1883 Stone, Edward, F.S.A., 3, Lansdowne Place, Blackheath. 

1882 Stone, John M., M.A., 5, St. Germans Place, Blackheath. 

( Vice-President.) 

1896 Walker, G. M., 35, Bennett Park, Blackheath. 

1895 Weare, Joseph C, 77, St. John's Park, Blackheath. {Council.) 

1877 Webster, William, F.C.S., 50, Lee Park, Blackheath. {Council.) 

*Wire, Travers B., " Blakes," Lymington, Hants. 

1891 Witherby, Harry F., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U., The Royal Societies' 
Club, St. James' Street, London, S.W. 

1903 Wolfsberger, W. J., 29, Manor Park, Lee. 

1884 Wrigley, P. T., M.A., " Shrublands," Kew, Surrey. {Council.) 

12 MAY. 1904 

Meetings of tbe Societp. 


Wednesday , March . • . 

„ May 
„ October ••• 

„ November 

„ January • - 

,, February 

The Chair is taken at Eight o'clock. 

23rd, 1904. 
27th, „ 
25th, „ 
26th, „ 
23rd, „ 
Hth, ,, 

25th, 1905* 

22nd, ,, (Annual)